Search: disallowance

7 results for “disallowance”+ Section 55Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai58 Ahmedabad7 Raipur6 Kolkata5 Delhi5 Bangalore4 Surat3 Lucknow3 Pune3 Chennai2 Chandigarh2 Rajkot2 Indore1 SC1 Nagpur1 Jaipur1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)8 Section 55A5 Capital Gains4 Addition to Income4 Section 143(3)3 Long Term Capital Gains3 Disallowance3 Section 143(1)2 Section 143(2)2 Section 250

CHIRAG BHARATBHAI AMIN,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, assessee's appeal stands allowed

ITA 1694/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Ms. Madhumita Roy (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri C. Dharninath V.S, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 55ASection 66A

disallowance sustained by the Ld. CIT (A) suffers from legal infirmity. The same may kindly be deleted. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of appeal.” 3. The case made out by the assessee is this that

CHIRAG BHARATBHAI AMIN,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3,, GANDHINAGAR

HARSHADKUMAR HARGOVANDAS PATEL,KALOL vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, MEHSANA

CHIRAG BHARATBHAI AMIN,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3,, GANDHINAGAR

HARSHADKUMAR HARGOVANDAS PATEL,KALOL vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, MEHSANA

YOGESH JASHUBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4) NOW WARD- 1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

YOGESH JASHUBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4) NOW WARD- 1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

MR. JOBANJI THAKOR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO. WARD-3(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

ACIT CC 2(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AISHA DHIRAJ GOGIA, AHMEDABAD