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

money in garb of long term capital gain and, thus, claim raised by her was to be rejected. 23. The Bombay High Court in the case of Sanjay Bimalchand Jain v. PCIT [2018] 89 taxmann.com 196 (Bombay)held that where assessee had purchased shares of penny stocks companies at lesser amount and within a year sold such shares at much

SABBIRALI ALIMIYA SAIYED,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 904/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-15 वष"

capital gain declared by the assessee as bogus and unexplained money under section 68 of the Act. 4.2 The assessee

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI MAHESH SOMABHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

unexplained cash credit.” 8. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Shri Nileshkumar Dashratbhai Patel (in ITA No. 55/Ahd/2020 dated 16.08.2022) considered the very same script of SRK Industries Ltd. and allowed the Long Term Capital Gain claimed by the assessee by observing as follows: “10. We have heard the rival contentions of both

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

money (unrecorded cash). These were related to properties such as Khoral Land (Survey 38/1/1), Shilpgram Land (Jaspur - 651) and Flat advances for A-902 Silver Harmony. The CIT(A) concluded that the transactions were capital in nature and are to be taxed under capital gains. The CIT(A) allowed deduction for unaccounted expenses related to these transactions for calculating taxable

THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(4), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI NILESHKUMAR DASHRATHBHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

capital gains from penny stocks: If the transaction is supported by documents like contract notes, demat statements etc and is routed through the stock exchange and if the payments are by account payee cheques and there is no evidence that the cash has gone back to the assessee's account, it has to be treated as a genuine transaction

THAKORBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD- 3(1)(1), VADODARA

money of ₹1,05,72,000/- in cash,\nwhich was not disclosed. Since the assessee failed to substantiate the receipt\nof such cash with any evidence, the Assessing Officer treated ₹1,05,72,000/-\nas unexplained receipt taxable as “income from other sources\". The\nAssessing Officer also treated ₹4,98,000/- as short-term capital gain

SHRI DINESH CHHAGANLAL THAKKAR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-1 , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 51/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-2016

capital gain arising from sale of shares as unexplained cash credit. In my case, I have submitted all the documents such as contract notes of transactions, demat statement showing timely inward- outward entries, bank statement showing payment and receipts, broker accounts, books of accounts showing that the purchase sale is made from the regular books of accounts etc and therefore

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain in the return of income. Based on certain materials found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer concluded that the real rate of land in question was Rs. 16,000/- per sq. yard and hence the Assessing Officer held that the actual sale consideration was Rs. 8,42,36,640/- (Rs. ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 & 08 others Shri

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain in the return of income. Based on certain materials found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer concluded that the real rate of land in question was Rs. 16,000/- per sq. yard and hence the Assessing Officer held that the actual sale consideration was Rs. 8,42,36,640/- (Rs. ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 & 08 others Shri

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain in the return of income. Based on certain materials found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer concluded that the real rate of land in question was Rs. 16,000/- per sq. yard and hence the Assessing Officer held that the actual sale consideration was Rs. 8,42,36,640/- (Rs. ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 & 08 others Shri

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain in the return of income. Based on certain materials found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer concluded that the real rate of land in question was Rs. 16,000/- per sq. yard and hence the Assessing Officer held that the actual sale consideration was Rs. 8,42,36,640/- (Rs. ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 & 08 others Shri

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain in the return of income. Based on certain materials found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer concluded that the real rate of land in question was Rs. 16,000/- per sq. yard and hence the Assessing Officer held that the actual sale consideration was Rs. 8,42,36,640/- (Rs. ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 & 08 others Shri

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain in the return of income. Based on certain materials found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer concluded that the real rate of land in question was Rs. 16,000/- per sq. yard and hence the Assessing Officer held that the actual sale consideration was Rs. 8,42,36,640/- (Rs. ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 & 08 others Shri

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain in the return of income. Based on certain materials found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer concluded that the real rate of land in question was Rs. 16,000/- per sq. yard and hence the Assessing Officer held that the actual sale consideration was Rs. 8,42,36,640/- (Rs. ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 & 08 others Shri

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain in the return of income. Based on certain materials found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer concluded that the real rate of land in question was Rs. 16,000/- per sq. yard and hence the Assessing Officer held that the actual sale consideration was Rs. 8,42,36,640/- (Rs. ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 & 08 others Shri

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

capital gain in the return of income. Based on certain materials found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer concluded that the real rate of land in question was Rs. 16,000/- per sq. yard and hence the Assessing Officer held that the actual sale consideration was Rs. 8,42,36,640/- (Rs. ITA No. 210/Ahd/2020 & 08 others Shri

SHRI PANNALAL BAIJNATH JAISWAL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1142/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

money of assessee by way of cash. The Ld.DR accordingly contended that it is ostensible that the assessee has failed to discharge its onus miserably. 16. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The first issue concerns as to whether the gains arising on sale of immovable property in question is to be considered as Short Term Capital Gain (STCG

DCIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ALPESHKUMAR C.PATEL, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

capital gain in the event the assessee makes the sale of its bungalow in dispute. It is because the revenue has not doubted on the incurrence of such expenses while framing the assessment. Besides the above, all the necessary details of the construction expenses were made available to the authorities below along with the addresses and the payments were made