GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED.,,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.805/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 & Asst.Year : 2013-2014

255 ITR 273 (SC) which held that "the Assessing Officer does not have the jurisdiction to go behind the net profit shown in the profit and loss account except to the extent provided in the Explanation to Section 115J." The Court declines to frame a question on the above issue." 21. Apart from the above, we have a binding precedent

GUJARAT FLUOROCHEMICALS LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.805/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 & Asst.Year : 2013-2014

255 ITR 273 (SC) which held that "the Assessing Officer does not have the jurisdiction to go behind the net profit shown in the profit and loss account except to the extent provided in the Explanation to Section 115J." The Court declines to frame a question on the above issue." 21. Apart from the above, we have a binding precedent

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI KAILASH RAMAVATAR GOENKA, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

255 60,61,749 30,95,708 - Unaccounted cash expenses in respect c of A-902, Silver 4,80,000 NIL 12,27,604 24,66,410 Harmony - Unaccounted cash investment in d respect of A-902, NIL NIL 74,92,000 NIL Silver Harmony - Unexplained e expenditure u/s NIL 4

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

255/- in respect of contract research receipts : At the outset the appellant most respectfully submits that in respect of upward adjustment in with regards to transaction in the nature of contract research receipt from Dishman USA Inc is amounting to Rs.2,96,26,763/- is concerned, the same is not at all tenable as the total contacts research receipt with

DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,,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

255/- in respect of contract research receipts : At the outset the appellant most respectfully submits that in respect of upward adjustment in with regards to transaction in the nature of contract research receipt from Dishman USA Inc is amounting to Rs.2,96,26,763/- is concerned, the same is not at all tenable as the total contacts research receipt with

THE ACIT,(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

255/- in respect of contract research receipts : At the outset the appellant most respectfully submits that in respect of upward adjustment in with regards to transaction in the nature of contract research receipt from Dishman USA Inc is amounting to Rs.2,96,26,763/- is concerned, the same is not at all tenable as the total contacts research receipt with

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

255/- in respect of contract research receipts : At the outset the appellant most respectfully submits that in respect of upward adjustment in with regards to transaction in the nature of contract research receipt from Dishman USA Inc is amounting to Rs.2,96,26,763/- is concerned, the same is not at all tenable as the total contacts research receipt with

THE DCIT(OSD)RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. DISHMAN PHARMACEUTICALS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

255/- in respect of contract research receipts : At the outset the appellant most respectfully submits that in respect of upward adjustment in with regards to transaction in the nature of contract research receipt from Dishman USA Inc is amounting to Rs.2,96,26,763/- is concerned, the same is not at all tenable as the total contacts research receipt with

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHANTI EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.884/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2016-2017 D.C.I.T., Shanti Exports Pvt. Ltd., Circle-4,(1)(1), Vs. 2Nd Floor, Ahmedabad. Chiripal House, Satellite Road, Ahmedabad.

4 group concerns on the annual rent of ₹24,000 per sister concern aggregating to Rs. 96,000. Only. The question arises whether the rent charged from the sister concern at ₹24,000 per annum represents the fair rental value. As far as the determination of the fair rental value is concern with respect to the table space rented

BHANUPRASAD MAGANLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

gain as the “business income” of the assessee and also denied the exemption u/s. 54F of the Act. 4. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee submitted that the determination of character of a particular investment in immovable property or any movable property like shares and securities, whether the same

SURESHBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL,VADODARA vs. ITO - WARD 1(2)(5), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 255-256/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-13 Sureshbhai Prabhudas Patel, D.C.I.T. Opp Parbadi Padra Road, Vs. Central Circle-2(1) Samiyala Village, Ahmedabad. Vadodara-390002. Pan: Atypp6249H

255-256/AHD/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-13 Sureshbhai Prabhudas Patel, D.C.I.T. Opp Parbadi Padra Road, Vs. Central Circle-2(1) Samiyala Village, Ahmedabad. Vadodara-390002. PAN: ATYPP6249H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Samir Parikh, A.R Revenue by : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12/10/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement

SURESHBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL,VADODARA vs. ITO - WARD 1(2)(5), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 255-256/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-13 Sureshbhai Prabhudas Patel, D.C.I.T. Opp Parbadi Padra Road, Vs. Central Circle-2(1) Samiyala Village, Ahmedabad. Vadodara-390002. Pan: Atypp6249H

255-256/AHD/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-13 Sureshbhai Prabhudas Patel, D.C.I.T. Opp Parbadi Padra Road, Vs. Central Circle-2(1) Samiyala Village, Ahmedabad. Vadodara-390002. PAN: ATYPP6249H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Samir Parikh, A.R Revenue by : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12/10/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement

POPULAR ESTATE MANAGEMENT LTD.,(PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS PIONEER TECHNOPARK LTD),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2703/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13) Popular Estate Management The Dcit बनाम/ Ltd. Circle-3(1)(1) Vs. (Previously Known As Pioneer Ahmedabad Technopark Ltd.) 81, New York Tower – A Opp. Muktidham Derasar Sg Highway Thaltej Cross Road Ahmedabad -380 054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcm 0617 P .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Dhiren Shah & Shri Nupur Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Subhas Bain Cit-Dr

4. The societies finally sold the land to related person of assessee. 5. The societies paid compensation almost 85% of sales consideration to assessee. 6. Assessee after the receipt of compensation transferred the amount to related party. 9.8. As per the finding of the learned CIT (A), the entire flow of transaction was made as represented above to escape from

SHRI LAXMANBHAI JIVRAJBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 421/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 ) बनाम/ Laxmanbhai Jivrajbhai Patel The Dcit M/S.Shree Krishna Vijay Saw Circle-5(3) Vs. Mills Ahmedabad Lati Gbazar Zone-3 Geeta Mandir Ahmedabad-380 022 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abhpp 3999 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.J. Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Nilam Das Gupta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 08/05/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 17/06/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–5, Ahmedabad [Cit(A) In Short] Vide Appeal No.Cit(A)-5/Dcit Cir.5(3)/10530/2017-18 Dated 08/12/2017 Arising In The Assessment Order Passed Under S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 16/02/2016 Relevant To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- Laxmanbhai Jivrajbhai Patel Vs.Dcit Asst.Year - 2013-14 1. The Cit(Appeals) Erred In Not Granting Deduction Of Rs.94,90,000/- Paid Towards Cancellation Of Banakhat While Computing The Short Term Capital Gains, Which Arose On Sale Of Agricultural Land. The Appellant Reserves Its Right To Add, Amend, Alter Or Modify Any Of The Grounds Stated Hereinabove Either Before Or At The Time Of Hearing. The Only Issue Raised By The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Not Granting The Deduction Amounting To Rs. 94,90,000/- Paid Towards Cancellation Of Banakhat Against The Income Under The Head Capital Gain.

4. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that the assessee has not brought any iota of evidence suggesting that there was some dispute between the assessee and the prospective buyers. Moreover, the assessee has entered into another agreement without cancelling the 1st agreement. The learned DR also claimed that the compensation paid by the assessee cannot be qualified

SHRI DASHRATH AMBALAL PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -7(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 296/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Dashrath Ambalal Patel, Ito, बनाम/ 9, Jashwant Society, Ward – 7(2), Vs. Jodhpur Char Rasta, Satellite, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad – 380 015. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Akypp 5852 G .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. N. Divatia & Mehul Talera, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri N. J. Vyas, Sr. D.R.

4. “ 168451 11.02.2006 3,50,000/- 5. “ 168452 15.12.2006 3,50,000/- 6. “ 270376 29.04.2011 8,34,000/- 7. “ 270377 10.05.2011 3,50,000/- 8. “ Cash 10.05.2011 5,000/- 5.1 As per the assessee, the payment above was made before the date of execution of the purchase deed, i.e. 10.10.2011. 5.2 The assessee further claimed that the delay in getting

MEENABEN NARENDRABHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 143/Ahd/2019 2010-11 Shri Apurva Narendra Patel, Income Tax 255, Nathamukhis Bunglow, Officer, Anand Chowk, Ward-6(1)(4), Kokhara Gam, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan No. Agcpp7272M 2. 142/Ahd/2019 2010-11 Meenaben Narendrabhai Income Tax Patel, Officer, 255, Nathamukhis Bunglow, Ward-6(1)(4), Anand Chowk, Kokhara Gam, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan No.Aqgpp1762L 3. 144/Ahd/2019 2010-11 Mitesh Narendrabhai Patel, Income Tax 255, Nathamukhis Bunglow, Officer, Anand Chowk, Kokhara Gam, Ward-6(1)(4), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan No.Aqgpp1777K

255, Nathamukhis Bunglow, Officer, Anand Chowk, Kokhara Gam, Ward-6(1)(4), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. PAN No.AQGPP1777K (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R Revenue by : Shri R.R.Makwana, Sr.D.R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06/05/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 23/06/2021 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeals have been filed

TORRENT POWER LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,RANGE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

255, where it was held as under: The provisions of sections 251 and 254(1) as well as the various judicial pronouncements make it clear that the powers of the AAC are wider than those of the Tribunal. The AAC, while hearing an appeal under section 251 can examine all matters covered by the assessment order and correct the assessment

SHRI GOVINDBHAI VITHALBHAI MORADIYA,,RAJKOT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3),, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as stated above

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

section 50C of the Act @ 12.5% : Rs. 34,50,255 Less: Cost of acquisition : Rs 19,12,125 (Rs.18,00,000/- against cost and Rs. 1,12,125/-) --------------------- Short Term Capital Gain : Rs. 15,38,130 Accordingly, short term capital gain of Rs. 15,38,130/- is added to the total income of the assessee by the AO. 3. Against