BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

74 results for “disallowance”+ Section 50Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai311Delhi210Ahmedabad74Jaipur72Chennai69Kolkata53Hyderabad45Bangalore40Pune31Indore28Surat22Raipur21Nagpur17Chandigarh16Visakhapatnam16Rajkot11Lucknow10Guwahati9Jodhpur8Jabalpur5Agra4Karnataka2Allahabad1Cuttack1Ranchi1Varanasi1Telangana1Calcutta1Panaji1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 50C75Addition to Income48Section 143(3)47Disallowance34Section 271(1)(c)27Section 54F20Capital Gains20Deduction19Penalty19Section 143(2)

RAMESH GOVINDBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 64/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 50C

Section 50C was introduced. While the Government must be complimented for the unparalleled swiftness with which the Easwar Committee recommendations, as accepted by the Government, were implemented, I, as a judicial officer, would think this was still one step short of what ought to have been done inasmuch as the amendment, in tune with the judge made law, ought

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

ITA 3295/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 74 · Page 1 of 4

12
Section 14812
Section 14712
ITAT Ahmedabad
11 Jun 2019
AY 2011-12
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 48Section 50C

Section 50C was introduced. While the Government must be complimented for the unparalleled swiftness with which the Easwar Committee recommendations, as accepted by the Government, were implemented, I, as a judicial officer, would think this was still one step short of what ought to have been done inasmuch as the amendment, in tune with the judge made law, ought

SHRI BHAVESHBHAI O. LAKHANI,,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3),, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 1196/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Us. Bhaveshbhai O Lakhani Vs. Ito Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 2 Of 9

Section 143(3)Section 48Section 50CSection 50C(1)

Section 50C was introduced. While the Government must be complimented for the unparalleled swiftness with which the Easwar Committee recommendations, as accepted by the Government, were implemented, I, as a judicial officer, would think this was still one step short of what ought to have been done inasmuch as the amendment, in tune with the judge made law, ought

SHRI GOVINDBHAI G. BHARWAD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-6,, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2436/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2436/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Govindbhai G. Bharwad, D.C.I.T., 1, Vushwas Residency, Vs. Circle-6, Opp. Malav Kutir, Ahmedabad. B/H Hitarth Party Plot, Sola, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divetia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr..D.R
Section 50CSection 68

section 50C was introduced. [Para 8] “ 9.5 We also find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Agra ITAT Rajiv Kumar Agarwal v. ACIT [IT Appeal No. 337 (Agra) of 2013] which was followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High court in case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. reported in 377 ITR 635 where

DILIP MOHANDAS DEVANI,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our above directions

ITA 272/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 50CSection 54

section 50C of the Act and disallowing the cost of Dilip Mohandas Devani vs. ITO Asst. Year –2012-13 - 4– improvement

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

ITA 805/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowed the claim of the assessee. 45. After considering submissions of the both the sides, we find that though the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) has held that if the payment to PF and ESI are not being made within the due date prescribed under those Act, then deduction will

GUJARAT FLUROCHEMICALS LIMITED.,,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2744/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

disallowed the claim of the assessee. 45. After considering submissions of the both the sides, we find that though the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) has held that if the payment to PF and ESI are not being made within the due date prescribed under those Act, then deduction will

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. M/S. GUJARAT INFRA PIPES PVT. LTD.,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 987/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR and Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 50C

50C of the Act 6,71,29,538/- (vi) Disallowance on account of Excess Depreciation 4,58,137/- Claimed on Software Licenses (vii) Capitalization of Interest on Capital Work in Progress 47,37,168/- (viii) Disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of the Act 60,517/-. 2.1. Thus, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee as Rs.7

GUJARAT INFRAPIPES PVT. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 813/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR and Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 50C

50C of the Act 6,71,29,538/- (vi) Disallowance on account of Excess Depreciation 4,58,137/- Claimed on Software Licenses (vii) Capitalization of Interest on Capital Work in Progress 47,37,168/- (viii) Disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of the Act 60,517/-. 2.1. Thus, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee as Rs.7

JAYSHRIBEN BHARATBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 449/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Guptaasstt.Year :2011-12 Jayshriben Bharatbhai Patel Ito, Ward-1(3)(2) Village :Garadi Vs Vadodara. Taluka :Sinor Vadodara 391 210 Pan : Bjupp 1758 E

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah
Section 148Section 250(6)Section 50CSection 54F

50C of the Act, but at the same time, rejected valuation of cost of acquisition of the property adopted by the AO on the basis of valuation done by the DVO, and directed the AO to adopt the value of cost of acquisition taken by the assessee. He further upheld the denial of claim of deduction under section

GALAXY GLOBAL PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 134/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.134/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014 Galaxy Global Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., 4Th Floor Commercial House, Vs. Circle-2(1)(2), Opp. Rajvansh Tower, Ahmedabad. Near Surel Bunglows, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Deelip Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Section 50C of the Act and ought to have quashed the Assessing Officer's order. 2. Without prejudice to the above, on facts and in the circumstances of the Appellant's case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming disallowance

SHRI KIRIT N. NAGAR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1),, BARODA

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

ITA 3431/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Oct 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 50CSection 54FSection 68

section 50C of the Act and disallowance of claim of exemption under section 54F of the Act, the Ld. CIT(Appeals

THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. BAJAJ HERBALS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the Revenue is, thus, allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1088/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 194A(1)Section 194A(3)Section 40

disallowance of freight expenses of Rs. 3414124/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The A.O. in the impugned order considered payment of Rs. 3414124/- to eight parties in respect of freight and forwarding expenses (already discussed para 4A above) and rejected appellants explanation that due TDS was deducted as per the provisions as evidenced by photo copies of invoices

KAMLESHBHAI MANUBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 814/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Tr Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 50C

section 50C of the Act, to compute the short-term capital gain derived by the assessee on the sale of land. It was found that the stamp duty paid on the sale of land was at jantri value of Rs. 1.37 crores. Accordingly, the AO had taken the sale consideration of land at Rs.1.37 crores and worked out STCG

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3462/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, S.R. D.R
Section 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)

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. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 986/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, S.R. D.R
Section 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)

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

SHRI NEERAV SHAILESH PAREKH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 535/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 48

Section 50C in as much as what is transferred is neither land nor building, it is the shares of a private limited company. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has given reasonable justification in the sale consideration Assessment Year: 2008-09 Page 4 of 7 received between two class of shareholders. One class of shareholders were also the tenants

MOHAMMEDAARIF YUNUSBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1) (PREVIOUSLY WARD-1(2)(3)), VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 14/AHD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 69A

disallowance under Section 50C of the Act on the basis of his report. The ground taken by the assessee is allowed

MOHAMMEDAARIF YUNUSBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 15/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 69A

disallowance under Section 50C of the Act on the basis of his report. The ground taken by the assessee is allowed

MOHAMMEDAARIF YUNUSBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1) (PREVIOUSLY WARD-1(2)(3)), VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 16/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 69A

disallowance under Section 50C of the Act on the basis of his report. The ground taken by the assessee is allowed