RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT., RANGE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT.,(OSD)CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

4) / 80IB (10) of the Act. Also, construction of college complex is not covered under the definition of development of infrastructure facility within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the Act. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for deduction under section 80-IA/80IB of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of this work and accordingly disallowed

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-6,, AHMEDABAD vs. VISHAL ENGINEERING & GALVANIZERS,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

disallowance of Rs.25,46,06,987/- on account of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) and Rs.3,26,02,919/- on account of Short Term Capital Gain (STCG). 4. The brief facts leading to this case is this that the assessee engaged in the business of Manufacturing of Transmission Towers and Job work of Engineering Fabrication and Galvanizing, filed its return