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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

undisclosed capital gain on Land Block No. 325 & 485A respectively which has been added without considering & appreciating the facts that that relevant capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

undisclosed capital gain on Land Block No. 325 & 485A respectively which has been added without considering & appreciating the facts that that relevant capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

undisclosed capital gain on Land Block No. 325 & 485A respectively which has been added without considering & appreciating the facts that that relevant capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

undisclosed capital gain on Land Block No. 325 & 485A respectively which has been added without considering & appreciating the facts that that relevant capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

undisclosed capital gain on Land Block No. 325 & 485A respectively which has been added without considering & appreciating the facts that that relevant capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

undisclosed capital gain on Land Block No. 325 & 485A respectively which has been added without considering & appreciating the facts that that relevant capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

undisclosed capital gain on Land Block No. 325 & 485A respectively which has been added without considering & appreciating the facts that that relevant capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

undisclosed capital gain on Land Block No. 325 & 485A respectively which has been added without considering & appreciating the facts that that relevant capital gain of survey no. 485 has been declared in return of income

SHRI VATSAL NAVNITLAL PARIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Vatsal Navnitlal Parikh Ito, Ward-5(2)(1) 501, Belvedere Flat Vs Ahmedabad. 5Th Floor, Jodhpur Cross Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aavpp 9647 H Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt.Rajshri Vastal Parikh Ito, Ward-5(2)(1) 501, Belvedere Flat Vs Ahmedabad. 5Th Floor, Jodhpur Cross Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Acypp 8836 H अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divetia, Advocate Revenue By : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar: These Appeals Are Filed By Two Assessees Against Orders Of Even Dated I.E. 27.12.2018 Passed By Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad [For Short “Ld.Cit(A)] Relating To The Assessment Year 2015-16. Since Common Issue Is Raised In Both The Appeals, We Dispose Of Them By This Common Order.

undisclosed long term capital gain is confirmed. The ground of appeal is dismissed.” 5. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. ITA No.182 and 183/Ahd/2019 5 6. Before us, the assessee has moved an application under Rule 29 of the Income

SMT. RAJSHRI VASTAL PARIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Vatsal Navnitlal Parikh Ito, Ward-5(2)(1) 501, Belvedere Flat Vs Ahmedabad. 5Th Floor, Jodhpur Cross Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Aavpp 9647 H Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt.Rajshri Vastal Parikh Ito, Ward-5(2)(1) 501, Belvedere Flat Vs Ahmedabad. 5Th Floor, Jodhpur Cross Road Ahmedabad. Pan : Acypp 8836 H अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Divetia, Advocate Revenue By : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar: These Appeals Are Filed By Two Assessees Against Orders Of Even Dated I.E. 27.12.2018 Passed By Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad [For Short “Ld.Cit(A)] Relating To The Assessment Year 2015-16. Since Common Issue Is Raised In Both The Appeals, We Dispose Of Them By This Common Order.

undisclosed long term capital gain is confirmed. The ground of appeal is dismissed.” 5. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. ITA No.182 and 183/Ahd/2019 5 6. Before us, the assessee has moved an application under Rule 29 of the Income

SHAILESH SUBODHCHANDRA JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

undisclosed income as Long term Capital gain. The High Court made the following observations: The authorities found that the assessee

SHAILESH S. JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

undisclosed income as Long term Capital gain. The High Court made the following observations: The authorities found that the assessee

SHAILESH SUBODHCHANDRA JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

undisclosed income as Long term Capital gain. The High Court made the following observations: The authorities found that the assessee

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI KAILASH RAMAVATAR GOENKA, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

income is taxed, in line with the statutory provisions and the principles of equity and justice. 13.2. On the specific issue of indexation benefit, we agree with the assessee’s contention that once the capital gains arising from the transfer of the asset are accepted, its computational mechanism, including the benefit of indexation, must also be adopted in accordance with

SMT. BHAVNABEN MAHESHBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

undisclosed sources of income of the partnership firm. 10. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee in the present case is an individual and deriving his income from house property, share of profit from the firm, capital gain

SHRI MAHESHBHAI S PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

undisclosed sources of income of the partnership firm. 10. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee in the present case is an individual and deriving his income from house property, share of profit from the firm, capital gain

SMT. BHAVNABEN MAHESHBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

undisclosed sources of income of the partnership firm. 10. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee in the present case is an individual and deriving his income from house property, share of profit from the firm, capital gain

SHRI SHANTILAL PRABHUDAS PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

undisclosed sources of income of the partnership firm. 10. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee in the present case is an individual and deriving his income from house property, share of profit from the firm, capital gain