SURESHBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL,VADODARA vs. ITO - WARD 1(2)(5), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 255-256/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-13 Sureshbhai Prabhudas Patel, D.C.I.T. Opp Parbadi Padra Road, Vs. Central Circle-2(1) Samiyala Village, Ahmedabad. Vadodara-390002. Pan: Atypp6249H

255-256/AHD/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-13 Sureshbhai Prabhudas Patel, D.C.I.T. Opp Parbadi Padra Road, Vs. Central Circle-2(1) Samiyala Village, Ahmedabad. Vadodara-390002. PAN: ATYPP6249H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Samir Parikh, A.R Revenue by : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12/10/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement

SURESHBHAI PRABHUDAS PATEL,VADODARA vs. ITO - WARD 1(2)(5), VADODARA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 255-256/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-13 Sureshbhai Prabhudas Patel, D.C.I.T. Opp Parbadi Padra Road, Vs. Central Circle-2(1) Samiyala Village, Ahmedabad. Vadodara-390002. Pan: Atypp6249H

255-256/AHD/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-13 Sureshbhai Prabhudas Patel, D.C.I.T. Opp Parbadi Padra Road, Vs. Central Circle-2(1) Samiyala Village, Ahmedabad. Vadodara-390002. PAN: ATYPP6249H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Samir Parikh, A.R Revenue by : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12/10/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement

TORRENT POWER LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,RANGE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

House, Nr. Circle-8, Dinesh Hall, Off Ashram Ahmedabad. Road, Ahmedabad-380009. PAN: AACCT0294J 2. 776/Ahd/2012 2008-09 Torrent Power Limited, A.C.I.T., Ahmedabad. Range-8, Ahmedabad. PAN: AACCT0294J 3. 738/Ahd/2012 2008-09 A.C.I.T., Torrent Power Circle-8, Limited, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. PAN: AACCT0294J 4. 1581/Ahd/2012 2009-10 Torrent Power Limited, A.C.I.T., Ahmedabad-380009. Range-8, Ahmedabad. PAN: AACCT0294J ITA nos.1577/AHD/2015 with

SHRI DASHRATH AMBALAL PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -7(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 296/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Dashrath Ambalal Patel, Ito, बनाम/ 9, Jashwant Society, Ward – 7(2), Vs. Jodhpur Char Rasta, Satellite, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad – 380 015. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Akypp 5852 G .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. N. Divatia & Mehul Talera, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri N. J. Vyas, Sr. D.R.

255 ITR 315 held that if the conditions u/s 54F of the Act are substantially satisfied then assessee is entitled for deduction. Hon'ble Gujarat high court full such in the case of CIT Vs. Mormasji Manchariji Vaid (2001) 250 ITR 542 categorically held that it is the date of execution of immovable property rather than date of registration which

THE ITO, WARD-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ADANI POWER RAJASTHAN LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, cross objection of the assessee on this score stands allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1430/Ahd/2015 With Cross Objection No. 114/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

property. Likewise, the company may have income from other sources. The company may also, as in that case, keep the surplus funds in short- term deposits in order to earn interest. Such interest will be chargeable under section 56 of the Act. This Court also emphasised the fact that the company was not bound to utilise the interest so earned

M/S. PRATHAM DEVELOPERS,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2),, BARODA

255 CTR 149 (Mad.) wherein it has been held that each residential block in a housing project is a 'housing project' in itself for purpose of claiming deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. It has been held by the High Court that the proportionate deduction has to be allowed to the assessee in respect of the units which fulfill

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2),, BARODA vs. M/S. PRATHAM DEVELOPERS, BARODA

255 CTR 149 (Mad.) wherein it has been held that each residential block in a housing project is a 'housing project' in itself for purpose of claiming deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. It has been held by the High Court that the proportionate deduction has to be allowed to the assessee in respect of the units which fulfill

DCIT, CIR, 4(2), AHMEDABAD vs. BHARATKUMAR BABUBHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

4 of the "Banakhat in which it is agreed upon that the vendor of the property will provide title clearance certificate and till that date, the period of this Banakhat will be extended automatically. The A. O has considered one condition of the Banakhat but it seems that the condition mentioned in para 11 that till the title clearance certificate

DCIT, CIR.4(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. LALITBHAI JAYANTIBHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

4 of the "Banakhat in which it is agreed upon that the vendor of the property will provide title clearance certificate and till that date, the period of this Banakhat will be extended automatically. The A. O has considered one condition of the Banakhat but it seems that the condition mentioned in para 11 that till the title clearance certificate

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1659/Ahd/2015 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1689/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2008-09 ) बनाम/ 1. Sun Pharmaceuticals 1. The Acit Industries Ltd. Cen.Cir-1 Vs. “Sparc” Tandalja Baroda – 20 2. The Acit 2. Sun Pharmaceu- Central Circle-1 Ticals Industries Baroda Ltd. Baroda. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcs 3124K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri R.C. Panday, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 28/03/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 20/06/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Cross-Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–2, Vadodara [Cit(A) In Short] Vide Appeal No.Cab/(A)- 2/387/2014-15 Dated 31/03/2015 Arising In The Assessment Order Passed Under S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 14/02/2014 Relevant To Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. Ita Nos.1659/Ahd/2015 (By Assessee) & Ita No.1689/Ahd/2015 (By Revenue) Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. Vs. Acit Asst.Year - 2008-09 2

property rights shall belong to UTL and the Appellant shall be having no rights whatsoever on the dossiers developed in its premises. 2.5 It is also the argument of the Id. DR that the consideration payable by UTL to the Appellant was vague and not specifically stated in the said agreement. The Id. DR also highlighted the clause

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 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

THE ITO, WARD-9(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. SHRI HARI ASSOCIATES, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Royincome Tax Appeal No.1874/Ahd/2011 (Assessment Year : 2008-09) & Income Tax (Search &Seizer)Appeal Nos. 128, 129 &130/Ahd/2014 (Assessment Years : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08)

Property Act. But it was the contention of the Learned AO that all the expenses were made on behalf of Co- op society who has ultimate liability towards such expenses. In terms of the agreement till the completion of the housing project the work-in-progress was to be computed on the basis of work contract which according

THE ACIT,(OSD)CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD vs. TORRENT POWER LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the Cross-objection of the assessee, both are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Amarjit Singh

House Vs. Ahmedabad Nr.Dinesh Hall Off Ashram Road, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCT 0294 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objector) Revenue by : Shri Samir Tekriwal, CIT-DR Assessee by : Shri Vartik Chowkshi सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of Hearing 03/03/2020 05 /03/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement आदेश