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

section 50D would be applicable after the AO comes to a finding that consideration received is not ascertainable or cannot be determined. We have extracted the finding of the ld.DRP. Nowhere such aspect is discernible. The ld.AO as matter of fact accepted the sale consideration at Rs.1 crore. He only replaced with fair market value on the basis

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

section 50D would be applicable after the AO comes to a finding that consideration received is not ascertainable or cannot be determined. We have extracted the finding of the ld.DRP. Nowhere such aspect is discernible. The ld.AO as matter of fact accepted the sale consideration at Rs.1 crore. He only replaced with fair market value on the basis

SHRI JAIPRAKASH DEVKINANDAN CHIRIPAL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 405/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014 Jaiprakash Devkinandan Chiripal, D.C.I.T, 283, New Cloth Market, Vs. Circle-1(1)(2) Outside Raipur Gate, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380002. Pan: Aajpa4564C

capital gain. 3.2 In response to questions put forward by AO, the assessee made following representations: 1) He has entered into an agreement for purchase of impugned land situated at Makarba with Khoadaji Mansingh bhai thakor and baldeji thakor on 15-02-2006 and paid an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the seller out of the total amount

THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. ARUNABEN KAUSHIKKUMAR PATEL,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the order of ld

Bench: Or During The Course Of The Appellate Proceedings.”

capital gains tax was offered by Mr. Ganpatbhai Patel on the sale transaction claimed to be entered through Banakhat in the year 2000. The father of the assessee, Mr. Ganpatbhai Patel admittedly received a sum of Rs. 53,26,000/- in cash, but there is nothing on record to show that the possession in the afore-said was transferred

ARUNABEN KAUSHIKKUMAR PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the order of ld

Bench: Or During The Course Of The Appellate Proceedings.”

capital gains tax was offered by Mr. Ganpatbhai Patel on the sale transaction claimed to be entered through Banakhat in the year 2000. The father of the assessee, Mr. Ganpatbhai Patel admittedly received a sum of Rs. 53,26,000/- in cash, but there is nothing on record to show that the possession in the afore-said was transferred

STERLING ADDLIFE INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. PR. CIT-4,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.967/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14) बनाम/ Sterling Addlife India The Pr.Cit-4 Pvt.Ltd. Ahmedabad Vs. Sterling Hospital Buildings Off Gurukul Road Memnagar Ahmedabad-380 052 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadca 0897 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Dinal Shah & A.C.Shah, Ars ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 28/01/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 27/03/2019 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–4, Ahmedabad [Cit In Short] Dated 28/03/2018 Relevant To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

capital gain income by the agreement to sale which fulfills the criteria of section 2(47) clause (v) of the Act read with section 53A

THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(7),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI GAUTAMBHAI BABARBHAI PATEL,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Shri Gautambhai Babarbhai Patel, Ward 3(2)(7), Vs 1, Laxmikunj Society, Isanpur Ahmedabad Vatva Road, Isanpur, Ahmedabad-382 443 Pan : Aknpp 4848 G अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ankit Talsania, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.S. Shukla, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29/03/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/04/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-:

Gain arising from the sale of agricultural land, a deduction of Rs.86,50,005/- was claimed by the assessee under Section 54B of the Act for the investment made in purchase of two new agricultural lands. In this regard, it was noted by the Assessing Officer that his agricultural land was transferred by the assessee on 13.06.2011 while

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-7,, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI DILIP RAMANLAL PARIKH,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.914/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

capital gain of Rs. 64,89,000/- and denial of claim of deduction u/s 54EC of Rs. 50,00,000/-. The A.O. after analyzing sale deed of impugned property emphasized that- (i) As per purchase deed, the impugned property is purchased in 2006-07 (Para 9 page no. 8) and period of holding is less than 36 months. (ii) Appellant

THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. DARSHINIBEN M. ADANI,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2011-12 Ito, Ward-5(2)(3) Smt. Darshiniben M. Adani Ahmedabad. Vs. 9, Maitri Society Opp: Goyal Tower Ambawadi, Ahmedabad Pan : Aatpa 6568 N

capital gain from the above transaction is related to A.Y .2011-12 and not in A.Y. 2007-08. The contention of the appellant during the assessment, proceedings was that the properties were transferred in F.Y. 2006-07 as per the provisions of Section 53A

SHRI DEVENDRASINGH A. JADEJA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 53A of the transfer of properties Act, 1882. The learned AR accordingly contended that notwithstanding the execution of sale deed at a later date, the right and interests in the capital asset (land parcels) accrued in favour of the assessee from the date of first agreement i.e. earnest agreement. For this purpose, the learned AR relied upon the decisions

SHRI PRAKASH PILLAI,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar] Assessment Year : 2008-09

Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act) which result in enforceable rights, for the purposes of the Income Tax. The scheme of the Act puts it beyond doubt that even rights or interests in a property are kinds of property that are transferable capital assets. Thus, there is no doubt that booking rights or rights to purchase the apartment

INOX RENEWABLES LIMITED,VADODARA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE1(1)(2), , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1731/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Inox Renewables Ltd. Vs. Acit, Cir.1(1)(2) Vadodara. Abs Towers 2Nd Floor Old Padra Road Vadodara 390 007 Pan : Aacci 4628 K

gains. It will be observe that this letter and 6 The intimation dated Page no 30.03.2012 to the Stock intimation are very important documents 49-50 from Exchange Mumbai was received and intimation to stock exchanges under DRP Order. SEBI act and rule and are statutory by Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd, intimations. Giving wrong information can Mumbai

THE ADIT(INTL. TAXN), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI AKSHAY RAJNIKANT PATEL,, ANAND

In the result, the appeal as also the Cross-Objection are dismissed

Bench: Us Is A Non Resident. During The Course Of Scrutiny Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noticed That The Assessee Has Offered To Tax Short Term Capital Gain Of Rs.94,325/-. When He Probed The Matter Further

capital gains accordingly. Aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) who reversed the action of the Assessing Officer and observed as follows:- “6.3 I have gone through the facts of the case, the assessment order, the two submissions made by the appellant and the case law. It is observed that the acquisition of one third share

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. KAVITA V. ADANI, AHMEDABAD

Appeal are allowed

53A of T.P. Act, 1882, read with section 2(47) of the Income tax Act, 1961 can be invoked? 5. Whether the gain offered for tax unlawfully by the assessee on transfer of agricultural land not being a capital

THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. BALAJI ELECTRICAL INSULATORS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground NO.2 of the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

gain. The AO also made disallowance of consultancy fees amounting to Rs.4,50,000/- and added the same to the total income of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). It was vehemently contended with reference to the various clauses of the development agreement that the developer do not have any domain over the land

SHRI CHIRAG NAVNITBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royअपील सं./Ita No.2166/Ahd/2018 &"नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2015-2016

Section 2(47) r.w.s. 53A of transfer of property Act are satisfied. 3.5. Facts of the case and the submission are considered. The AO has rejected the appellant's contention of long term capital gain

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1 NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 311/Ahd/2016 2010-11 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 2. 2176/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 3. 2173/Ahd/2016 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 4. 165/Ahd/2017 2012-13 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 5. 287/Ahd/2017 2012-13 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 6-7 520 & 2013-14 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., 521/Ahd/2018 & Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 8-9 604 & 605/ 2013-14 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Ahd/2018 & Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K

section 43D is a beneficial provision but the provision iS very clear when it states that " {a} in the case of a scheduled bank the income by way of interest in relation to such categories of bad and^dou^btful debts as may be prescribed having regard to the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India in relation

THE ITO-WARD-1(2)(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. LALITABEN GOVINDBHAI PATEL,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 875/Ahd/2016 & Cross Objection No. 76/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito, Smt. Lalitaben बनाम/ Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad, Govindbhai Patel Vs. A-Wing, Room No. 103, Ganesh House, 1St Floor, Pratyaksh Kar Nr. Dharnidhar Derasar, Bhavan, Ambawadi, New Vikas Gruh Road, Ahmedabad- 380015 Paldi Bhatta, Ahmedabad- 380007 Smt. Lalitaben Govindbhai Ito, Patel Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad, Ganesh House, A-Wing, Room No. 103, 1St Floor, Pratyaksh Kar Nr. Dharnidhar Derasar, New Vikas Gruh Road, Bhavan, Ambawadi, Paldi Bhatta, Ahmedabad- 380015 Ahmedabad- 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aea Pp9 516 L (Appellant/Respondent) .. (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : O. P. Sharma, Cit Dr, Lalit P. Jain, Sr. Dr Nupur Patel ""यथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 03/01/2019 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 22/03/2019 Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R Per Mahavir Prasad - Jm: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Appeal No. Cit(A)-10/Ito-Wd/2(1)/370/2014-15 Dated 03.02.2016 Arising From Assessment Order Dated 26.06.2014. In The

53A of the Transfer of Property Act, the transfer took place on 25.03.2009. The assessee had claimed that the said land was sold to Melody Complex Pvt. Ltd., vide initial agreement dated 15.09.2008 for Rs. 38,74,431/-. It is evident that the actual transfer took place vide Kajba Karar dtd. 23.03.2009 in favour of Gatil Properties Ltd. for sale