SHRI PIYUSH M DOBARIYA,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(4), VADODARA

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessees are dismissed

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

section 45(1) of the act, any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year I.T.A No. 595, 596 & 597/Ahd/2020 A.Ys. 2009-10 & 2010-11 Page No 10 Shri Piyush M. Dobariya vs. ITO & Ors. shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head "Capital gains" with certain conditions and exemptions

SOHAM NITINBHAI BHADIYADRA,BOTAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the asses is partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2018-19

Capital Gain Report were filed before the CIT(A) along with a petition under Rule 46A. The Acknowledgment of submissions before Commissioner appeal is attached here with this submission in Annexure A The Ld CIT(A) without calling for a remand report or seeking clarification under section

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2)(1) AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD vs. SONABEN ANILKUMAR VARIYA, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Ito, Ward-3(2)(1) Sonaben Anilkumar Variya Ahmedabad. Arhum Elegans Aec Cross Road City Naranpura Vistar So Ahmedabad. Pan : Amwpv 5380 Q (Applicant) (Responent) : None Assessee By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09 /10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

section 2(47) of the Act had taken place. The assessee also furnished a reconciliation between Form 26AS and the return of income, pointing out that transactions below Rs. 50 lakhs were not subjected to TDS and that this further explained the variation. It was emphasized that no TDS credit relating to Banakhat transactions had been claimed in the return

ATULBHAI AMRITLAL MEHTA,AHMEDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 3(2) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Capital Gain of Rs 248,90,919 under section 68 be deleted. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the High Pitched Order of the Id. A.O. without taking into account the Additional Evidences placed on record as per the Rule 46A

REJESHRI OMPRAKASH MALVIYA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1) (PREVIOUSLY WARD-4(1)(3)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

46A of Income Tax Rules.” 3. The assessee filed return of income on 25.03.2015 declaring total income of Rs.2,89,963/- for Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15. The case was selected for scrutiny and statutory notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 28.08.2015. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

gains must, therefore, be incidental. The requirement in Section 11(4A) of maintaining separate books of account is also in line with the necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section

JT.CIT(EXEMPTION)CIRCL-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

gains must, therefore, be incidental. The requirement in Section 11(4A) of maintaining separate books of account is also in line with the necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section

JT.CIT(E),CIRCLE -2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

gains must, therefore, be incidental. The requirement in Section 11(4A) of maintaining separate books of account is also in line with the necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section

JT.CIT(E), CIRCLE-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

gains must, therefore, be incidental. The requirement in Section 11(4A) of maintaining separate books of account is also in line with the necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

gains must, therefore, be incidental. The requirement in Section 11(4A) of maintaining separate books of account is also in line with the necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section

VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2 (EXEMP), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

gains must, therefore, be incidental. The requirement in Section 11(4A) of maintaining separate books of account is also in line with the necessity of demonstrating that the quantitative limit prescribed in the proviso to Section 2015), has not been breached. Similarly, the insertion of Section 13(5), seventeenth proviso to Section 10(23C) and third proviso to Section

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

gains derived by an undertaking or an enterprise from any eligible business , at such rates as specified in the section where the assessee develops or operates and maintains or develops , operate and maintain any infrastructure facility. The enterprise carrying on the business of (i) developing or (ii) operating and maintaining or(iii) developing , operating or maintaining any infrastructure facility which

KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.(OSD),CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

gains derived by an undertaking or an enterprise from any eligible business , at such rates as specified in the section where the assessee develops or operates and maintains or develops , operate and maintain any infrastructure facility. The enterprise carrying on the business of (i) developing or (ii) operating and maintaining or(iii) developing , operating or maintaining any infrastructure facility which

THE ACIT.(OSD), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. KHURANA ENGINEERING LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Roya.Y. 2007-08

gains derived by an undertaking or an enterprise from any eligible business , at such rates as specified in the section where the assessee develops or operates and maintains or develops , operate and maintain any infrastructure facility. The enterprise carrying on the business of (i) developing or (ii) operating and maintaining or(iii) developing , operating or maintaining any infrastructure facility which

JAGDISHSINH BHAGWANSINH MAHIDA,NA vs. ARIVS.THE ACIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

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

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13. 2. The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in dismissing

M/S. MAHA GUJARAT SILK SELECTION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(5), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.50/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S.Maha Gujarat Silk Section The Ito बनाम/ 402, Akshat Apartment Ward-5(2)(5) V/S. Opp. Suvidha Shopping Centre Ahmedabad Paldi Ahmedabad – 380 007 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aagfm 5457 M अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ritesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

46A, that is Computation of Income and the property purchase and sale agreement for calculation of Indexation purpose was already uploaded along with the Form 35 at the time of filing of appeal with of CIT (A). 5. That the in the facts and circumstances of the Id. NFAC ought not to have upheld the addition of Rs.35

HASMUKHBHAI HANSRAJ PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(7), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2015-16 Hasmukhbhai Hansraj Patel Vs. The Ito, Ward-3(3)(7) C-202, Suvas Residency Ahmedabad. Opp: Maghmalhar Society Nikol Road Ahmedabad 382350. Pan : Bpdpp 1078 Q

46A and claimed that cash of Rs.20,500/- was deposited out of his regular source of business income and balance cash of Rs.1 crore is deposited out of bank withdrawal from 5th December, 2014 to 6th December, 2014. The Appellant submitted that he has shifted his residence two years ago, hence was unable to receive the notices issued in Assessment

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3, GANDHINAGAR vs. SHRI RAMESH GOBARJI THAKOR, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year : 2010-11 Income-Tax Officer Vs. Shri Ramesh Gobarji Thakor Ward-3 Sector 11 Gandhinagar. Gandhinagar. Pan : Aespt 3446 H (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ars. Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/07/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

46A, sub-clause (b) of the Rules, which require the additional evidences to be admitted where the assessee adduces sufficient cause for not producing the same during the assessment proceedings, the ld.CIT(A) admitted the additional evidence. The ld.DR was unable to pointed out any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A) as above. In view of the same