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.

52 results for “house property”+ Section 233clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi523Karnataka443Mumbai236Bangalore126Cochin71Chennai55Ahmedabad52Jaipur45Raipur32Kolkata30Indore26Lucknow19Visakhapatnam18Hyderabad17Pune17Calcutta17Surat13Amritsar7Chandigarh7Nagpur7Patna7Rajkot7Telangana6Guwahati5Rajasthan5Jabalpur4Jodhpur3SC3Varanasi1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 80I85Section 143(2)38Addition to Income38Disallowance35Deduction26Section 143(3)22Section 14A17Section 10B15Section 54F12

SHRI NAGIN A VAGHELA,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for A

ITA 270/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyali.T(Ss).A. Nos.449/Ahd/2019 & 44/Ahd/2020 (A.Ys.: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Nagin A. Vaghela, Tax, 11, Purva Bunglow, Nr. Central Circle-3, Manglam Duple, Sama, Vadodara Vadodara [Pan No.Aakpw5302R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 158B

properties totaling Rs.73,879,600/-, but the assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanations or supporting documents for these transactions. Consequently, this amount was added back to the income by the Assessing Officer who also initiated separate penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income. In addition to the real estate transactions, the assessee claimed an unsecured loan

Showing 1–20 of 52 · Page 1 of 3

Section 115J11
Penalty11
Section 142(1)10

SHRI NAGIN A VAGHELA,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for A

ITA 1562/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyali.T(Ss).A. Nos.449/Ahd/2019 & 44/Ahd/2020 (A.Ys.: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Nagin A. Vaghela, Tax, 11, Purva Bunglow, Nr. Central Circle-3, Manglam Duple, Sama, Vadodara Vadodara [Pan No.Aakpw5302R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153Section 153ASection 158B

properties totaling Rs.73,879,600/-, but the assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanations or supporting documents for these transactions. Consequently, this amount was added back to the income by the Assessing Officer who also initiated separate penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income. In addition to the real estate transactions, the assessee claimed an unsecured loan

THE DY. CIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. AJAY ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, UNJHA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 2303/AHD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year:2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita Nos. 1621/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit, Patan Circle, Room No.104, Ajay Engineering Infrastructure 1St Floor, Santokba Hall, Rajmahal V. Pvt. Ltd., 98, Old Market Yard, Road, Patan-384265, Gujarat Unjha-384170 Gujarat Pan:Aagca8877L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Dcit, Patan Circle, Room M/S Ajay Protech Pvt. Ltd., 59, No.101/4, 1St Floor, Chinmay V. Pratap Chambers 1St Floor, Near Corporate House, Patan-Deesa Railway Circle, Unjha-384170, Highway, Patan-384265,Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Aajca4095R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue By: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.04.2024

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. ParinFor Respondent: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

233." 13. In the background of the above discussion, it can be summarized that an enterprise has to enter into an agreement with the Central or State Government or a Local Authority or any Statutory Authority. That undisputedly the infrastructure facility belonged to the Government, therefore the infrastructure facility is owned by the Government. But the enterprise which is developing

THE DY. CIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. AJAY ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, UNJHA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 2302/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year:2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita Nos. 1621/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit, Patan Circle, Room No.104, Ajay Engineering Infrastructure 1St Floor, Santokba Hall, Rajmahal V. Pvt. Ltd., 98, Old Market Yard, Road, Patan-384265, Gujarat Unjha-384170 Gujarat Pan:Aagca8877L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Dcit, Patan Circle, Room M/S Ajay Protech Pvt. Ltd., 59, No.101/4, 1St Floor, Chinmay V. Pratap Chambers 1St Floor, Near Corporate House, Patan-Deesa Railway Circle, Unjha-384170, Highway, Patan-384265,Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Aajca4095R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue By: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.04.2024

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. ParinFor Respondent: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

233." 13. In the background of the above discussion, it can be summarized that an enterprise has to enter into an agreement with the Central or State Government or a Local Authority or any Statutory Authority. That undisputedly the infrastructure facility belonged to the Government, therefore the infrastructure facility is owned by the Government. But the enterprise which is developing

THE ACIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. AJAY ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, UNJHA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 2118/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year:2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita Nos. 1621/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit, Patan Circle, Room No.104, Ajay Engineering Infrastructure 1St Floor, Santokba Hall, Rajmahal V. Pvt. Ltd., 98, Old Market Yard, Road, Patan-384265, Gujarat Unjha-384170 Gujarat Pan:Aagca8877L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Dcit, Patan Circle, Room M/S Ajay Protech Pvt. Ltd., 59, No.101/4, 1St Floor, Chinmay V. Pratap Chambers 1St Floor, Near Corporate House, Patan-Deesa Railway Circle, Unjha-384170, Highway, Patan-384265,Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Aajca4095R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue By: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.04.2024

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. ParinFor Respondent: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

233." 13. In the background of the above discussion, it can be summarized that an enterprise has to enter into an agreement with the Central or State Government or a Local Authority or any Statutory Authority. That undisputedly the infrastructure facility belonged to the Government, therefore the infrastructure facility is owned by the Government. But the enterprise which is developing

THE DY. CIT, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. AJAY ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, UNJHA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 1621/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year:2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita Nos. 1621/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit, Patan Circle, Room No.104, Ajay Engineering Infrastructure 1St Floor, Santokba Hall, Rajmahal V. Pvt. Ltd., 98, Old Market Yard, Road, Patan-384265, Gujarat Unjha-384170 Gujarat Pan:Aagca8877L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Dcit, Patan Circle, Room M/S Ajay Protech Pvt. Ltd., 59, No.101/4, 1St Floor, Chinmay V. Pratap Chambers 1St Floor, Near Corporate House, Patan-Deesa Railway Circle, Unjha-384170, Highway, Patan-384265,Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Aajca4095R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue By: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.04.2024

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. ParinFor Respondent: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

233." 13. In the background of the above discussion, it can be summarized that an enterprise has to enter into an agreement with the Central or State Government or a Local Authority or any Statutory Authority. That undisputedly the infrastructure facility belonged to the Government, therefore the infrastructure facility is owned by the Government. But the enterprise which is developing

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATAN CIRCLE,, PATAN vs. AJAY ENGG. INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, UNJHA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 1231/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year:2010-11 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita Nos. 1621/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit, Patan Circle, Room No.104, Ajay Engineering Infrastructure 1St Floor, Santokba Hall, Rajmahal V. Pvt. Ltd., 98, Old Market Yard, Road, Patan-384265, Gujarat Unjha-384170 Gujarat Pan:Aagca8877L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Dcit, Patan Circle, Room M/S Ajay Protech Pvt. Ltd., 59, No.101/4, 1St Floor, Chinmay V. Pratap Chambers 1St Floor, Near Corporate House, Patan-Deesa Railway Circle, Unjha-384170, Highway, Patan-384265,Gujarat Gujarat Pan:Aajca4095R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue By: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.04.2024

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Sh. ParinFor Respondent: Sh. Chetram Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

233." 13. In the background of the above discussion, it can be summarized that an enterprise has to enter into an agreement with the Central or State Government or a Local Authority or any Statutory Authority. That undisputedly the infrastructure facility belonged to the Government, therefore the infrastructure facility is owned by the Government. But the enterprise which is developing

SHRI KAMLESH CHANDRAKANT PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 634/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.DR
Section 54FSection 56Section 57

property filed the following documents: 1) Bill copy of material purchased for construction 2) Receipt of payment towards the electricity connection. 3.5 Further, the assessee submitted that section 54F is a beneficial provision and therefore it should be read out liberally because the legislature intent to promote the investment in residential house. 3.6 The assessee without prejudice to the above

THE DCIT, BARODA CIRCLE-1,, BARODA vs. AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assesse and the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1762/AHD/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 May 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT D.R
Section 14BSection 35DSection 37Section 40A(9)Section 43Section 43B

house property Rs.9,036/-, income from other sources Rs.1,25,40,914/- and business loss of Rs.10,26,63,568/-. The Assessing Officer made addition in respect of buying commission to Teknoserve (Jersey) Limited amounting to Rs.19,27,498/- as per the provision of Section 40(a)(i) of the Act. The Assessing Officer also disallowed interest on bonds issued

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1,, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assesse and the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1771/AHD/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 May 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT D.R
Section 14BSection 35DSection 37Section 40A(9)Section 43Section 43B

house property Rs.9,036/-, income from other sources Rs.1,25,40,914/- and business loss of Rs.10,26,63,568/-. The Assessing Officer made addition in respect of buying commission to Teknoserve (Jersey) Limited amounting to Rs.19,27,498/- as per the provision of Section 40(a)(i) of the Act. The Assessing Officer also disallowed interest on bonds issued

KUM.KULSUM ABDULRAZAK BANGADIWALA,BARODA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3),, BARODA

In the result, we see no reason to interfere

ITA 2036/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-आयकर अपील सं./ Ita.No.1802/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Mohmmad Afaque Abdulrazak Ito, Ward-5(1) Bangdiwala Baroda. Vs J.M. Villa, Killedar Kancha B/H. Mes Girls School Gendigate Baroda 390 001 Pan : Avvpb 8654 P आयकर अपील सं./ Ita.No.2036/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Kum. Kulsum Abdulrazak Ito, Ward-5(3) Baroda. Bangdiwala Vs J.M. Villa, Killedar Kancha B/H. Mes Girls School Gendigate Baroda 390 001 Pan : Aylpb 8030 A अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Smt. Kinjal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/02/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. Kinjal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 50CSection 54F

233 at Moje Sawad, Baroda. This land was sold by all the co-owners during the accounting period relevant to the Asstt.Year 2011-12 and they have disclosed sale consideration of Rs.75 lakhs. The stamp valuation authorities have determined the value of the property at Rs.1,26,23,100/- for the purpose of stamp duty payment. Thus, this value

MOHMMAD AFAQUE ABDULRAZAK BANGDIWALA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1),, BARODA

In the result, we see no reason to interfere

ITA 1802/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-आयकर अपील सं./ Ita.No.1802/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Mohmmad Afaque Abdulrazak Ito, Ward-5(1) Bangdiwala Baroda. Vs J.M. Villa, Killedar Kancha B/H. Mes Girls School Gendigate Baroda 390 001 Pan : Avvpb 8654 P आयकर अपील सं./ Ita.No.2036/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Kum. Kulsum Abdulrazak Ito, Ward-5(3) Baroda. Bangdiwala Vs J.M. Villa, Killedar Kancha B/H. Mes Girls School Gendigate Baroda 390 001 Pan : Aylpb 8030 A अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Smt. Kinjal Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/02/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. Kinjal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 50CSection 54F

233 at Moje Sawad, Baroda. This land was sold by all the co-owners during the accounting period relevant to the Asstt.Year 2011-12 and they have disclosed sale consideration of Rs.75 lakhs. The stamp valuation authorities have determined the value of the property at Rs.1,26,23,100/- for the purpose of stamp duty payment. Thus, this value

KOTHARI SANJAY MANILAL, HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 698/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 698/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19)

For Appellant: & Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54FSection 57

Section 54F of the Act. The Co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Kamlesh ITA No. 698/Ahd/2024 [KothariSanjay Manilal, HUF vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2018-19- 11 – Chandrakant Patel (supra) had also held that delay in the completion of construction of the house will not be a bar to the assessee for claiming the exemption provided u/s.54F

GUJARAT GAS TRADIANG CO.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 364/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

house / real estate agent / broker, who will be involved in merely identifying the right property for the prospective buyer / seller and once he completes the deal, he gets the commission. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, it cannot be said that the transaction partakes the character of "fees for technical services" as explained in the context of Section

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT GAS TRADING CO. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 468/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

house / real estate agent / broker, who will be involved in merely identifying the right property for the prospective buyer / seller and once he completes the deal, he gets the commission. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, it cannot be said that the transaction partakes the character of "fees for technical services" as explained in the context of Section

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT GAS TRADING CO. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2394/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

house / real estate agent / broker, who will be involved in merely identifying the right property for the prospective buyer / seller and once he completes the deal, he gets the commission. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, it cannot be said that the transaction partakes the character of "fees for technical services" as explained in the context of Section

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT GAS TRADING CO. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 467/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

house / real estate agent / broker, who will be involved in merely identifying the right property for the prospective buyer / seller and once he completes the deal, he gets the commission. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, it cannot be said that the transaction partakes the character of "fees for technical services" as explained in the context of Section

GUJARAT GAS TRADIANG CO.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2371/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

house / real estate agent / broker, who will be involved in merely identifying the right property for the prospective buyer / seller and once he completes the deal, he gets the commission. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, it cannot be said that the transaction partakes the character of "fees for technical services" as explained in the context of Section

GUJARAT GAS TRADIANG CO.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 363/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Gujarat Gas Trading Co Ltd
Section 143(3)Section 14A

house / real estate agent / broker, who will be involved in merely identifying the right property for the prospective buyer / seller and once he completes the deal, he gets the commission. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, it cannot be said that the transaction partakes the character of "fees for technical services" as explained in the context of Section

TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1285/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1285 & 1286/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & Ita No.1396 & 1397/Ahd/2018 Asstt.Year 2011-12 & 2012-13 Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent House Ahmedabad. Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1327 & 1328/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1414 & 1415/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Ahmedabad. Torrent House Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi, With Shri Biren Shah, Ars. Revenue By : Shri Mohd. Usman, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/11/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, With Shri Biren Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 35Section 80Section 92C

properties of the company including manufacturing facilities, research facilities and office premises. v. A minimum fixed asset cover of 1.1 times over these assets. vi. Net debt / EBIDTA to be not more than 4.5 times vii. Debt gearing not to exceed 1.65 times during the currency of facility. viii. Debt service cover ratio shall not be less than 1.33 times