RASIKBHAI RAMDAS PATEL,MEHSANA vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 98/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2011-2012 Rasikbhai Ramdas Patel, The Principal Commissioner Lal Vas, At. Thol, Vs. Of Income-Tax-3, Tal. Kadi, Ahmedabad Dist. Mehsana-382715. Gujarat.

section 50C of the Act. 5.1 Besides the above, the assessee further contended that the property in dispute was an agricultural land and therefore if any income is arising on transfer, the same cannot be made subject to tax as the capital gain

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

Capital Gain on a substantive basis, vide his order dated 29.12.2016.” 57. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gauranginiben S. Shodan, 45 taxmann.com 356 (Guj) has observed that section 48 of the Income tax Act talks about expression “full value of consideration received”. Therefore, it could not be replaced by fair market value with

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

Capital Gain on a substantive basis, vide his order dated 29.12.2016.” 57. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gauranginiben S. Shodan, 45 taxmann.com 356 (Guj) has observed that section 48 of the Income tax Act talks about expression “full value of consideration received”. Therefore, it could not be replaced by fair market value with

AMUL RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION,,ANAND vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3,, ANAND

capital gains shall be computed on the basis of such consideration under section 48 of the Income-tax Act. The scope of section 50C

RAVINDRABHAI SHANKARBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(5) NOW ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalthe Ito Ravindrabhai Shankarbhai Vs. Ward-1(2)(5). Patel Now Ito, Ward-1(2)(2) 86,Kanha Residency Vadodara – 390 007 Kalali Road, Kalali Ahmedabad – 390 012 [Pan : Aigpp 8415 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Assessee Represented By : Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue Represented By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 27/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026

capital gains have to be construed liberally. 8.1. With regard to the disallowance relating to investments in agricultural land, the learned counsel explained that the Assessing Officer disallowed payments relating to the Anklav land and the Chansad land on the sole ground that the payments were made after 31.07.2015. It was submitted that the law does not mandate that

SHRI AMRUTBHAI ATMARAMBHAI PATEL, HUF,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the ground no 1 of appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose, ground no

section 50C that once the document is registered with the stamp duty authority the value adopted/assessed by him for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer has to be considered as sale consideration u/s. 50C of the act. Consequently, the assessing officer has determined the long term capital gain

RAMESH GOVINDBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

capital gains shall be computed on the basis of such consideration under section 48 of the Incometax Act. The scope of section 50C

SHRI RAKESH AMBALAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(9),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 465/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

capital gains under-reported having regard to the provisions of Section 50C of the Act. 3. Grounds of appeal raised

SMT. VARSHABEN VIPULBHAI BHALANI,BARODA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 348/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Smt. Varshaben Dcit बनाम/ Vipulbhai Bhalani Central Circle – 2, Baroda Vs. 401, Chaitanya Apartment, 7, Laxmi Colony, Urmi Road, Baroda "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahvpb0323K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Smt. Urvashi Shodhan, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से / Ms. Anam Benish, Sr. D.R. Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 10/11/2022 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 23/11/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.11.2021 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad (In Short ‘Cit(A)’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Dated 09.10.2020 Passed By The Learned Dcit, Central Circle-2, Vadodara Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As To ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2011-12. Ita No. 348/Ahd/2021 (Smt. Varshaben V. Bhalani Vs. Dcit) A.Y. 2011-12 - 2 - 2. This Matter Relates To Levying Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Act To The Tune Of Rs.45,690/-.

capital gain under Section 48 of the Act, is to be replaced with the help of deeming fiction provided in this. This replacement is further subject to determination of FMV as contemplated under Section 2 of the Act. Thus, addition to the income of the assessee with the aid of Section 50C

SHRI BHAVESHBHAI O. LAKHANI,,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3),, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

Bench: Us. Bhaveshbhai O Lakhani Vs. Ito Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 2 Of 9

capital gains shall be computed on the basis of such consideration under section 48 of the Income-tax Act. The scope of section 50C

SMT. NIMA SOMABHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1301/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2012 Smt. Nima Somabhai Patel, Income-Tax Officer, 13, Shubhash Society, Vs. Ward-1(1)(3), B/H. Ishwar Bhuvan, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Acmpp1832B

50C of the Act on sale of agricultural land by observing that the land sold by the appellant are capital assets within the meaning of section 2(14)(iii) of the Act and liable for capital gains

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain is leviable in his hand. 23. On consideration of the above, we find that the ld.AO has made reference to the details in an incomplete manner. He made reference to the details of block no.73 on page no.49. This detail is being referred with an idea to harbor a belief that rate in the area was prevalent

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain is leviable in his hand. 23. On consideration of the above, we find that the ld.AO has made reference to the details in an incomplete manner. He made reference to the details of block no.73 on page no.49. This detail is being referred with an idea to harbor a belief that rate in the area was prevalent

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain is leviable in his hand. 23. On consideration of the above, we find that the ld.AO has made reference to the details in an incomplete manner. He made reference to the details of block no.73 on page no.49. This detail is being referred with an idea to harbor a belief that rate in the area was prevalent

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain is leviable in his hand. 23. On consideration of the above, we find that the ld.AO has made reference to the details in an incomplete manner. He made reference to the details of block no.73 on page no.49. This detail is being referred with an idea to harbor a belief that rate in the area was prevalent

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain is leviable in his hand. 23. On consideration of the above, we find that the ld.AO has made reference to the details in an incomplete manner. He made reference to the details of block no.73 on page no.49. This detail is being referred with an idea to harbor a belief that rate in the area was prevalent

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain is leviable in his hand. 23. On consideration of the above, we find that the ld.AO has made reference to the details in an incomplete manner. He made reference to the details of block no.73 on page no.49. This detail is being referred with an idea to harbor a belief that rate in the area was prevalent

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain is leviable in his hand. 23. On consideration of the above, we find that the ld.AO has made reference to the details in an incomplete manner. He made reference to the details of block no.73 on page no.49. This detail is being referred with an idea to harbor a belief that rate in the area was prevalent