SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income filled by the assessee and accordingly levied penalty on the same by Assessing officer which has been upheld by CIT Appeal. 3. The appellant also request to honourable court for condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income filled by the assessee and accordingly levied penalty on the same by Assessing officer which has been upheld by CIT Appeal. 3. The appellant also request to honourable court for condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income filled by the assessee and accordingly levied penalty on the same by Assessing officer which has been upheld by CIT Appeal. 3. The appellant also request to honourable court for condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income filled by the assessee and accordingly levied penalty on the same by Assessing officer which has been upheld by CIT Appeal. 3. The appellant also request to honourable court for condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground

SHRI ROHITJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income filled by the assessee and accordingly levied penalty on the same by Assessing officer which has been upheld by CIT Appeal. 3. The appellant also request to honourable court for condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income filled by the assessee and accordingly levied penalty on the same by Assessing officer which has been upheld by CIT Appeal. 3. The appellant also request to honourable court for condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground

SHRI ASHOKJI CHANDUJI THAKOR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income filled by the assessee and accordingly levied penalty on the same by Assessing officer which has been upheld by CIT Appeal. 3. The appellant also request to honourable court for condonation of delay in filling appeal. 4. The appellant craves for liberty to add fresh ground

DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

B, Jadav Chambers, Nos.259- 2010-11 Ashram Road, A.C.I.T, 9-10. 260/Ahd/2022 & Ahmedabad-380009. Central Circle-(1)(2), 2011-12 Ahmedabad. PAN: ASQPS7606E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms Nupur Shah, A.R Revenue by : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 19/01/2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 10/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R PER BENCH: The captioned appeals have

DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

B, Jadav Chambers, Nos.259- 2010-11 Ashram Road, A.C.I.T, 9-10. 260/Ahd/2022 & Ahmedabad-380009. Central Circle-(1)(2), 2011-12 Ahmedabad. PAN: ASQPS7606E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms Nupur Shah, A.R Revenue by : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 19/01/2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 10/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R PER BENCH: The captioned appeals have

DHARMENBHAI MAHENDRABHAI SUTARIA,HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), , AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalasstt. Sr.No.

B, Jadav Chambers, Nos.259- 2010-11 Ashram Road, A.C.I.T, 9-10. 260/Ahd/2022 & Ahmedabad-380009. Central Circle-(1)(2), 2011-12 Ahmedabad. PAN: ASQPS7606E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms Nupur Shah, A.R Revenue by : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 19/01/2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement: 10/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R PER BENCH: The captioned appeals have

THE ACIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI CHANDRAKANT G PATEL, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

capital gains tax, but that cannot be a case of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. It if has claimed any exemption after disclosing the relevant basic facts and under ignorance of the provisions of the Act, and not offered that amount for tax, in such cases, penalty should not be imposed. In such cases rather

SMT. RASHIDABEN TAHER MORAWALA,GODHRA vs. THE DCIT, INT.-TAXA., BARODA

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

271(1) (c) of the Act is not justified 4.1. Ld. Counsel Mr. Bandish Soparkar appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessment order passed in the case is barred by time, because the reference made by the Assessing Officer under section 142A is bad and illegal and cannot claim extension of time under section 153 Explanation 1

SHRI JITENDRA P.VAGHELA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-6(3), AHMEDABAD

capital gain declared by the assessee in his return filed in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act which income amounted to I.T.A No. 1731/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2009-10 Page No 3 Jitendra P. Vaghela vs. ITO Rs.13,29,340/- holding that the facts of the case clearly show that the assessee did not file his return of income either

SHRI KISHOREBHAI BHIKHABHAI VIRANI,,SURAT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHAVNAGAR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2299/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Kishorkumar Bhikhabhai Virani, D.C.I.T., 57, Adarsh Society, Vs. Circle 1, Atawa Lines, Ahmedabad. Surat-395001. Pan: Aawpv1516G

capital gain of Rs. 2,44,97,161/- to the total income of the assessee vide order dated 8 December 2017. 3.2 The AO in the assessment order has also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income by furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The AO finally has confirmed the penalty

SHRI BALDEVBHAI ATMARAM PATEL,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

capital gain arising from sale of residential house property • Assessing Officer rejected assessee's claim holding that assessee, being a company, was not entitled to claim deduction under section 54 - He also passed a penalty order under section 271(1)(c) for raising a patently false claim of deduction - Whether, on facts, Impugned penalty order did not require any interference

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, RACE COURSE vs. UNIMED TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, HALOL

Accordingly dismissed.\n18.9 Based on the findings and conclusions set out hereinabove, the\nappeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by\nthe assessee is partly allowed

271(1)(b) for non-compliance of notice under section 142(1). The\nadditions made by the Assessing Officer comprised the following:\ni. Software expenditure of Rs.31,96,245/-\nii. Testing fees of Rs.50,29,391/-\niii. Consultancy charges of Rs.2,18,58,050/-\niv. Foreign exchange fluctuation loss of Rs.3,17,88,107/-\nV. Interest expenditure of Rs.1

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR, AHMEDABAD vs. AIA ENGINEERING LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 397/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Aia Engineering Limited, Dcit Vs. 115, Gvmm Estate, Odhav Road, Circle-1(1)(1), Odhav, Ahmedabad-382415 Ahmedabad Pan : Aabca 2777 J आयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 532/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Aia Engineering Limited, Acit, Vs. 115, Gvmm Estate, Odhav Road, Circle-1(1)(1), Odhav, Ahmedabad-382415 Ahmedabad Pan : Aabca 2777 J अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Pratik Sharma, Sr Dr & Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2024 सुनवाई क" क" तारीख सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.10.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

271(1)(c) of the Act.” 10. The solitary issue in the present appeal relates to the disallowance of depreciation claimed by the assessee on goodwill. The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee before us was that:- (i) The intangible asset of good-will had accrued to the assessee on account of amalgamation of its wholly owned subsidiary

SHRI ASHISHBHAI NATWARLAL SOPARKAR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 517/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2016-17 Shri Ashishbhai Natwarlal Soparkar, A.C.I.T., Lane 13, Bunglow No.246, Vs. Circle-3(3), Satyagrah Chhavni, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad.

gain which was carried forward to the subsequent assessment years. The impugned loss was inclusive of the loss of ₹ 8,25,387/- which was to be ignored under the provisions of section 94(7) of the Act. 3.1 On question by the AO about the impugned loss of ₹ 8,25,387/-, the assessee agreed that such loss