RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA PVT. LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA LTD.,),HARYANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- These cross appeals filed by the Assessee and the Revenue are directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax ITA Nos. 1184/Ahd/2018 & 1225/Ahd/2018 Assessee : Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare (I) Ltd Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 2– (Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad (in short ‘the CIT(A)’) dated 09.03.2018 passed under Section

THE DY. CIT., CIRCLE-3,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHANDWALA INTEGRATED FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

22,702/- for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2014-15 respectively. In the result the ground No.3 raised by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2014-15 stands allowed. 35. Now we take up issue relating to gain/ loss from transactions of sale of shares and securities. This issue relates to Assessment Year

KIFS SECURITIES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT, RANGE- 3,, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

22,702/- for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2014-15 respectively. In the result the ground No.3 raised by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2014-15 stands allowed. 35. Now we take up issue relating to gain/ loss from transactions of sale of shares and securities. This issue relates to Assessment Year

KIFS SECURITIES LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT, RANGE- 3,, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

22,702/- for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2014-15 respectively. In the result the ground No.3 raised by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2014-15 stands allowed. 35. Now we take up issue relating to gain/ loss from transactions of sale of shares and securities. This issue relates to Assessment Year

KIFS SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

22,702/- for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2014-15 respectively. In the result the ground No.3 raised by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2014-15 stands allowed. 35. Now we take up issue relating to gain/ loss from transactions of sale of shares and securities. This issue relates to Assessment Year

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3,, AHMEDABAD vs. KIFS SECURITIES LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

22,702/- for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2014-15 respectively. In the result the ground No.3 raised by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2014-15 stands allowed. 35. Now we take up issue relating to gain/ loss from transactions of sale of shares and securities. This issue relates to Assessment Year

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. KIFS PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

22,702/- for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2014-15 respectively. In the result the ground No.3 raised by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2014-15 stands allowed. 35. Now we take up issue relating to gain/ loss from transactions of sale of shares and securities. This issue relates to Assessment Year

KIFS SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

22,702/- for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2014-15 respectively. In the result the ground No.3 raised by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2014-15 stands allowed. 35. Now we take up issue relating to gain/ loss from transactions of sale of shares and securities. This issue relates to Assessment Year

KIFS SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result Ground No.9 of the revenue is allowed for

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice P.P.Bhatt & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

22,702/- for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2014-15 respectively. In the result the ground No.3 raised by the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 to 2014-15 stands allowed. 35. Now we take up issue relating to gain/ loss from transactions of sale of shares and securities. This issue relates to Assessment Year

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-6,, AHMEDABAD vs. VISHAL ENGINEERING & GALVANIZERS,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

E-return that the accounts of the assessee were audited by a CA firm vide report dated 28.05.2011, as required u/s 44AB of the ITA No. 2316/Ahd/2014 & CO No.271/Ahd/2014 and ITA Nos.2954 & 3055/Ahd/2015 Vishal Engineerings And Galvanizers Asst.Years–2011-12 & 2008-09 Act. A hard copy of the said report was also furnished during the assessment proceeding. During the course

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. VISHAL ENGINEERING & GALVANIZERS,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

E-return that the accounts of the assessee were audited by a CA firm vide report dated 28.05.2011, as required u/s 44AB of the ITA No. 2316/Ahd/2014 & CO No.271/Ahd/2014 and ITA Nos.2954 & 3055/Ahd/2015 Vishal Engineerings And Galvanizers Asst.Years–2011-12 & 2008-09 Act. A hard copy of the said report was also furnished during the assessment proceeding. During the course

M/S. VISHAL ENGINEERS & GALVANIZERS,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-6,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

E-return that the accounts of the assessee were audited by a CA firm vide report dated 28.05.2011, as required u/s 44AB of the ITA No. 2316/Ahd/2014 & CO No.271/Ahd/2014 and ITA Nos.2954 & 3055/Ahd/2015 Vishal Engineerings And Galvanizers Asst.Years–2011-12 & 2008-09 Act. A hard copy of the said report was also furnished during the assessment proceeding. During the course

THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI VINOD V. PATEL,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr

22(2)(e) of Rs.24 lakhs stating that the assessee has not received the said amount directly from M/s. Prima Transformers Pvt. Ltd.” 3. Ground no.1 concerns characterization of income arising on sale of shares. Whereas the assessee has offered the action arising on sale of shares amounting to Rs.61,46,343/- under the head ‘capital gains

CHINMAY GAURANGBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT (INTER.TAXA)-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed

E R PER P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad (“CIT(A)” in short) dated 18.03.2019 and the grounds raised therein read as under:- “1. The learned CIT(Appeals) erred both in law and in fact in confirming the order

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. PRATHAM INVESTMENTS,, BARODA

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 742/Ahd/2015, 3078 & 3077/Ahd/2016 With Cross Objection No. 76/Ahd/2015 & 9/Ahd/2017 & I.T.A. No. 3087/Ahd/2016 (In I.T.A. Nos. 742/Ahd/2015, 3078 & 3077/Ahd/2016) & ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14)

e. At page 141 para 23 of the reported decision it has also been held that section 45(2) provides for a situation of conversion of capital asset into ITA No. 747/Ahd/14 [M/s. Pratham Investments vs. DC IT] A.Y. 2005-06 - 8 – stock in trade. In such a case the profits accruing have been expressly made taxable. There

M/S. PRATHAM DEVELOPERS,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

In the result, Ground No.4 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed in part

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 742/Ahd/2015, 3078 & 3077/Ahd/2016 With Cross Objection No. 76/Ahd/2015 & 9/Ahd/2017 & I.T.A. No. 3087/Ahd/2016 (In I.T.A. Nos. 742/Ahd/2015, 3078 & 3077/Ahd/2016) & ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14)

e. At page 141 para 23 of the reported decision it has also been held that section 45(2) provides for a situation of conversion of capital asset into ITA No. 747/Ahd/14 [M/s. Pratham Investments vs. DC IT] A.Y. 2005-06 - 8 – stock in trade. In such a case the profits accruing have been expressly made taxable. There

HARSHADKUMAR AMRUTLAL PATEL,MEHSANA vs. DCIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE, MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 361/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16)

section 2(13) of the Act, the term "business" is defined as under- "Business includes any trade, commerce or manufacture of any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture" 6.2 Further, there is no definition of "Adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture" in the Income-tax Act. Therefore, various judicial pronouncements

DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, (OSD),RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee and delete penalty confirmed by the ld

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

22)(e) of the Act is not applicable on the transactions between these two parties. Considering our finding in the Asstt.Year 2005-06, we do not find any merit in this ground of appeal. It is rejected. ITA No.692 /Ahd/2011 and 7 Others ACIT Vs. Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals 31 44. Ground No.6 and 7: These grounds are inter-connected with