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

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

2. Jurisdictional Ahmedabad ITAT order in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s.Aakash Association; 3. Supreme Court, CIT Vs. George Henderson and Co. Ltd., 66 ITR 622 SC; 4. CIT Vs. Shivakami Co.P.Ltd., SC 159 ITR 0071; 5. Rupees Finance & Management Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Mumbai, ITAT (2008) 27 CCH 0111 Mum Trib. (2008) 119 TTJ 0643; 6. CIT Vs. Smt. Nandini

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

2. Jurisdictional Ahmedabad ITAT order in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s.Aakash Association; 3. Supreme Court, CIT Vs. George Henderson and Co. Ltd., 66 ITR 622 SC; 4. CIT Vs. Shivakami Co.P.Ltd., SC 159 ITR 0071; 5. Rupees Finance & Management Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Mumbai, ITAT (2008) 27 CCH 0111 Mum Trib. (2008) 119 TTJ 0643; 6. CIT Vs. Smt. Nandini

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

SATTARBHAI SULEMANBHAI MANSURI,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3, HIMATNAGAR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2014-15 Mr.Sattarbhai Sulemanbhai Mansuri Ito,Ward-3 Anjumarstrit Narth Gulam Floor Factri Vs. Himatnagar. Sarvoday Soc, Polo Ground Himatnagar Sabarkantha 383 001. (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Varis Isani, Advocate Assessee By : Shri Ravindra, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

capital gain under section 50C, adopting the stamp duty value of Rs.1,12,37,120/- as the deemed sale consideration. The assessee’s 1/5th share was determined at Rs.22,47,424/-, after deducting indexed cost of Rs.2,22,833/-. The AO did not refer the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) under section 50C(2

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. KETABEN JANAKBHAI PATEL,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

2) of the Act. Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, deals with the determination of the value of a capital asset for ITO vs. Ketaben Janakbhai Patel Asst.Year –2012-13 - 5– calculating capital gains

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.

50C of the Act. iii. It was also contended that the land in dispute being agricultural land falls within the provisions of section 2(14) of the Act and therefore the same cannot be made subject to capital gain

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

2) and 54F(4) of the Act. According to the lower authorities, since certain investments and deposits in the Ravindrabhai Shankarbhai Patel vs. ITO A.Y: 2015-16 Capital Gain Account Scheme were made after the due date prescribed under section 139(1), i.e. 31.07.2015, the assessee was held to be ineligible for deduction to that extent. The counsel submitted that

ANILKUMAR DWARKAPRASAD MODANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)(PREVIOUSLY DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)), VADODARA

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.1572/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani The Dy.Cit बनाम/ A-17, Videocon Housing Colony Circle-2(1)(1) V/S. Chavaj, Bharuch 392 002 Vadodara (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Acnpm 0273 C अपीलाथ&/ (Appellant) '( यथ&/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hemant Suthar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26/12/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14, In Which The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao)”] Under Section 50C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] Was Confirmed Vide Assessment Order Dated 28/03/2016. Facts Of The Case: 2. The Assessee, An Individual Earning Income From Salaries, Trading In Shares & Securities, Capital Gains & Other Sources, Filed His Return Of Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani Vs. The Dcit Asst. Year : 2013-14

Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] was confirmed vide assessment order dated 28/03/2016. Facts of the case: 2. The assessee, an individual earning income from salaries, trading in shares and securities, capital gains

SIRHIND STEELS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-4, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 713/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Sirhind Steel Ltd., P.C.I.T-4, 7Th Floor, Shalin Building, Vs. Ambawadi, Nr. Nehru Bridge Corner, Ahmedabad. Ashram Road, Ahmedabad.

2(11), will refer to the block of assets on which the same rate of depreciation is prescribed. As long as there is no surplus on sale of assets which form part of the block of assets, i.e., assets carrying the same rate of depreciation, short-term capital gain would not be payable. However, if there is surplus, then short

CLAYKING MINERALS LLP,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-5, MEHSANA

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

50C and sub-section (15) of section 155 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the stamp duty value of such property for the purpose of this sub- clause as they apply for valuation of capital asset under those sections;" 9. On a plain reading, it is seen that section 56(2)(x) of the Act mentions

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

2 of 10 under consideration. Thus the agreed price should be taken to consideration while computing the capital gain and deficit for the year should be worked out after considering the capital gain computed taking the circle rate of 2007 and after indexing the amount of capital asset. It is submitted that it be so held now.” 3. The assessee

AURA SECURITIES PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.834/Ahd/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Dcit, Aura Securities Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1, V Akhay Building, B/H, Vadilal Ahmedabad. S. House, 53, Shrimali Society, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aabct4637N आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.986/Ahd/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Aura Securities Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Akhay Building, B/H, Vadilal Vs. Circle-1, House, 53, Shrimali Society, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aabct4637N

50C of the Act concerning immovable properties under the head capital gain. Thus in the absence of any specific provision to determine the sale price of the shares of the listed company, we are inclined to hold that the price declared by the assessee is correct and within the provisions of law. 10.7 We also find that a new section

AURA SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.834/Ahd/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Dcit, Aura Securities Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1, V Akhay Building, B/H, Vadilal Ahmedabad. S. House, 53, Shrimali Society, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aabct4637N आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.986/Ahd/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Aura Securities Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Akhay Building, B/H, Vadilal Vs. Circle-1, House, 53, Shrimali Society, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009 Pan: Aabct4637N

50C of the Act concerning immovable properties under the head capital gain. Thus in the absence of any specific provision to determine the sale price of the shares of the listed company, we are inclined to hold that the price declared by the assessee is correct and within the provisions of law. 10.7 We also find that a new section

VISHNUBHAI MAFATBHAI DESAI,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2849/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15)

2) of section 56, the cost of acquisition of such property shall be deemed to be the value which has been taken into ITA No.2849/Ahd/17 [Vishnubhai M. Desai Vs. ITO] A.Y. 2014-15 - 7 - account for the purposes of the said clause (vii) or clause (vita). It means that in case the buyer of the property has acquired the property

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 according to sale consideration determined on the basis of stamp duty value of the property. Accordingly the assessing officer has determined the stamp value of the property at Rs.3,40,00000/- and worked out capital gain at Rs. 19,90,196/- in respect of assessee’s shares of 387 sq. yard. The assessee was also show caused

SHRI NATWARBHAI J. PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

2) is also covered by the requirements of Section 23A(6) which are, as specifically stated in Section 50C, applicable in the present context. The same is the position with respect to the proceedings before this Tribunal. While the correctness of the DVO report can indeed be challenged before us as well, as a corollary to the powers

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), BARODA vs. SHRI NATWARBHAI J. PATEL, VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

2) is also covered by the requirements of Section 23A(6) which are, as specifically stated in Section 50C, applicable in the present context. The same is the position with respect to the proceedings before this Tribunal. While the correctness of the DVO report can indeed be challenged before us as well, as a corollary to the powers