SHRI GIRISHBHAI VADILAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 330, 331 & 332/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) िनधा"रण वष" Girishbhai Vadilal Shah Dcit बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 139, V R Shah Smruti Circle – 4(1)(2), Vs. Shikshan Mandir, Nr. Ahmedabad Dharnidhar Derasar, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abjps3102P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad, (In Short The ‘Cit(A)’), (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) All Dated 16.03.2020 For The Assessment Year 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. As The Issues Involved In The Three Appeals Are Common, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Vide This Common Order.

138 taxmann.com 309 (Bangalore-Trib.) ITA Nos. 330, 331 & 332/Ahd/2020 [Shri Girishbhai Vadilal Shah vs. DCIT] A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2016-17 - 7 – 9. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the materials on record. There is no dispute to the fact that disallowance of Rs.77,15,185/- as made by the AO under Section

SHRI GIRISHBHAI VADILAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 330, 331 & 332/Ahd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17) िनधा"रण वष" Girishbhai Vadilal Shah Dcit बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम 139, V R Shah Smruti Circle – 4(1)(2), Vs. Shikshan Mandir, Nr. Ahmedabad Dharnidhar Derasar, Vasna, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abjps3102P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad, (In Short The ‘Cit(A)’), (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) All Dated 16.03.2020 For The Assessment Year 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. As The Issues Involved In The Three Appeals Are Common, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Vide This Common Order.

138 taxmann.com 309 (Bangalore-Trib.) ITA Nos. 330, 331 & 332/Ahd/2020 [Shri Girishbhai Vadilal Shah vs. DCIT] A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2016-17 - 7 – 9. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the materials on record. There is no dispute to the fact that disallowance of Rs.77,15,185/- as made by the AO under Section

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

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपील सं/ITA No.264/Ahd/2019\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16\nMr. Jobanji Thakor\nThe ITO\nF-40, Abugiri Society\nबनाम / Ward-3(2)(2)\nTal. Daskroi, Jagatpur\nv/s.\nAhmedabad\nAhmedabad - 382 470\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AKNPT 2930 M\n(अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)\nAssessee by:\nShri Mehul K. Patel, AR\nRevenue by :\nShri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR\nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date of

house and agricultural land as and when funds were\navailable from the sale of the property. This, according to the AR, clearly\ndemonstrates that the capital gains were genuinely reinvested in qualifying\nassets, thereby fulfilling the substantive conditions for claiming exemptions\nunder Sections 54F and 54B. The AR emphasized that minor procedural\nlapses in timing or ownership structure should

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. 20. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee appeared and argued that for both the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, the facts and issues for consideration are similar. Since the facts in both the years are identical the observations and ratio

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. 20. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee appeared and argued that for both the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, the facts and issues for consideration are similar. Since the facts in both the years are identical the observations and ratio

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. 20. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee appeared and argued that for both the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, the facts and issues for consideration are similar. Since the facts in both the years are identical the observations and ratio

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. 20. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee appeared and argued that for both the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, the facts and issues for consideration are similar. Since the facts in both the years are identical the observations and ratio

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. 20. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee appeared and argued that for both the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, the facts and issues for consideration are similar. Since the facts in both the years are identical the observations and ratio

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. 20. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee appeared and argued that for both the assessment years 2003-04 and 2004-05, the facts and issues for consideration are similar. Since the facts in both the years are identical the observations and ratio

SHRI JITENDRA NARSINHBHAI TALPADA,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble & "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ito, Ward-6(1) Shri Jitendra Narsinhbhai Talpada53, Vadodara. Atmajyotinagar Society Vs. Nr. Tejas Vidyalaya, Ellora Park Vadodara 390 023. Pan : Aagpt 2465 A (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Deelipkumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2020

house property income at Rs.20,35,116/- after giving deduction under section 24(a) of the Act at Rs.6,10,535/-, he made addition of Rs.14,24,581/-. In this way, total income of the assessee has been determined at Rs.22,03,058/-. Dissatisfied with this treatment, the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld.CIT(A) has dismissed

SHRI JITENDRA NARSINHBHAI TALPADA,,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(1),, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble & "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ito, Ward-6(1) Shri Jitendra Narsinhbhai Talpada53, Vadodara. Atmajyotinagar Society Vs. Nr. Tejas Vidyalaya, Ellora Park Vadodara 390 023. Pan : Aagpt 2465 A (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Deelipkumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2020

house property income at Rs.20,35,116/- after giving deduction under section 24(a) of the Act at Rs.6,10,535/-, he made addition of Rs.14,24,581/-. In this way, total income of the assessee has been determined at Rs.22,03,058/-. Dissatisfied with this treatment, the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld.CIT(A) has dismissed

CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed as not pressed

property transferred or services provided in a comparable uncontrolled transaction, or a number of such transactions, is identified, and then such price is adjusted to account for differences, if any, between the international transaction and the comparable uncontrolled transactions or between the enterprises entering into such transactions, which could materially affect the price in the o pen market. Usually loan

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. PRIYAL INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

138/- which may yield tax free income. The assessing officer has asked the assessee to explain disallowance of interest expenses as per the provisions of section 14A of the act r.w.s. 8D of the IT Rules, 1962. The assessee explained that it has mainly made investment in partnership firm, therefore, section 14A was not applicable in its case and further

M/S. S P CHIPS POTATO PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

138/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and the assessee claimed depreciation @30% on opening WDV I.T.A No. 548/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 Page No. 3 M/s. S.P. Chips Potato Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT of ₹ 22.95 lakhs under the head “plant and machinery”. However, Ld. Pr. CIT noticed that no such asset eligible for depreciation @30% is found

RAMCHANDRA SINGH RANA,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year : 2017-18 Ramchandra Singh Rana The Ito, Ward-3 A-301, Shubh Apartments Vs Gandhinagar. Saysan, Gandhinagar. Pan : Aatpr 0485 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri Paras S. Savla, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ravindra, Ld.Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/12/2025

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The assessee, in this appeal, is aggrieved by the action of the ld.CIT(A) in confirming addition made by the Assessing Officer (“AO” for short) of Rs.10.00 lakhs into the income of the assessee on account of unexplained cash deposits during

SWASTIK DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-2018 Swastik Developers The Ito, Ward-3(3)(5), 21, Swastik House Vs. Ahmedabad. B/H.Sardar Patel Stadium Ahmedabad. Pan : Acyfs 0641 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Prashant Shrivastav, Ar Assessee By : Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/08/2025

House Vs. Ahmedabad. B/h.Sardar Patel Stadium Ahmedabad. PAN : ACYFS 0641 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Prashant Shrivastav, AR Assessee by : Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.DR Revenue by सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 07/08/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश PER MAKARAND V.MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal has been preferred by the assessee

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of certain expenses. 30. The assessee during the year has incurred total research and development expenses amounting to Rs. 11,962.75 lacs. But the assessee claimed weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of the expenses amounting to Rs. 11,271.35 lacs only. As such the assessee omitted

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of certain expenses. 30. The assessee during the year has incurred total research and development expenses amounting to Rs. 11,962.75 lacs. But the assessee claimed weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of the expenses amounting to Rs. 11,271.35 lacs only. As such the assessee omitted

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-1,, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of certain expenses. 30. The assessee during the year has incurred total research and development expenses amounting to Rs. 11,962.75 lacs. But the assessee claimed weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act in respect of the expenses amounting to Rs. 11,271.35 lacs only. As such the assessee omitted