SMT. VANITA VASWANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years : 2010-11 Smt. Vanita Vaswani, The Pcit (Central), 2, Samprat Co-Op. Housing Vs Ahmedabad Society Limited, Opp. Rivera, 11, Prahladnagar, Ahmedabad - 380015 Pan : Aakpv 7868 D अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "त् "त् यथ" "त् "त् यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, Ar & Shri Vijay Govani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Virendra Ojha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/09/2021 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Rajpal Yadav: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Ahmedabad Dated 28.03.2021, Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), For Assessment Year 2010-2011. The Assessee Has Taken 7 Grounds Of Appeal Which Read As Under:- “1. The Ld. Pcit (Central), Ahmedabad ("The Pcit") Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Invoking Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") & Has Further Erred In Directing The Ld. Ao To Pass Fresh Assessment Order Incorporating The Market Value Of The Property As Per Section 50C Of The Act. 2. The Ld. Pcit Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Passing Order U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In The Case Of The Appellant In Failing To Take Smt. Vanita Vaswani Vs. Pr. Cit Ay : 2010-2011 2

Housing Vs Ahmedabad Society Limited, Opp. Rivera, 11, Prahladnagar, Ahmedabad - 380015 PAN : AAKPV 7868 D अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "त् "त् यथ" "त् "त् यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, AR & Shri Vijay Govani, AR Revenue by : Shri Virendra Ojha, CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 28/07/2021 घोषणा

JIVABHAI MADHABHAI DESAI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(2) PRESENT JURISDICTION THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Housing Society, Isanpurgam Present Jurisdiction Ahmedabad, Gujarat-382443 The Income-Tax Officer, [PAN : ARHPD 8125 F] Ward 1(2)(3), Ahmedabad (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Pritesh Shah, CA Respondent by: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr DR Date of Hearing 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.04.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal has been filed

SHRI NATWARBHAI J. PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

property and if such investment is made within the period stipulated therein, then Section 54F(4) is not at all attracted and therefore the contention that the assessee has not deposited the amount in the Bank account as stipulated and therefore, he is not entitled to the benefit even though he has invested the money in construction is also

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(4), BARODA vs. SHRI NATWARBHAI J. PATEL, VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

property and if such investment is made within the period stipulated therein, then Section 54F(4) is not at all attracted and therefore the contention that the assessee has not deposited the amount in the Bank account as stipulated and therefore, he is not entitled to the benefit even though he has invested the money in construction is also

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(5), VADODARA vs. SHRI VINODBHAI J. PATEL, VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

property and if such investment is made within the period stipulated therein, then Section 54F(4) is not at all attracted and therefore the contention ITA Nos. 464 & 513/Ahd/2016 ITO vs. Vinodbhai J Patel -cross Assessment Year : 2012-13 Page 6 of 12 that the assessee has not deposited the amount in the Bank account as stipulated and therefore

SHRI VINODBHAI J. PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(5), VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

property and if such investment is made within the period stipulated therein, then Section 54F(4) is not at all attracted and therefore the contention ITA Nos. 464 & 513/Ahd/2016 ITO vs. Vinodbhai J Patel -cross Assessment Year : 2012-13 Page 6 of 12 that the assessee has not deposited the amount in the Bank account as stipulated and therefore

SHRI AMRUTBHAI ATMARAMBHAI PATEL, HUF,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the ground no 1 of appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose, ground no

section 50C according to sale consideration determined on the basis of stamp duty value of the property. Accordingly the assessing officer has determined the stamp value of the property at Rs.3,40,00000/- and worked out capital gain at Rs. 19,90,196/- in respect of assessee’s shares of 387 sq. yard. The assessee was also show caused

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

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

House gases), including carbon dioxide which is done through several ways such as by switching over to wind and solar energy, forest regeneration, installation of energy-efficient machinery, landfill methane capture, etc. The Kyoto Protocol commits certain developed countries to reduce their GHG emissions and for this, they will be given carbon credits. A reduction in emissions entitles the entity

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

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

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

House gases), including carbon dioxide which is done through several ways such as by switching over to wind and solar energy, forest regeneration, installation of energy-efficient machinery, landfill methane capture, etc. The Kyoto Protocol commits certain developed countries to reduce their GHG emissions and for this, they will be given carbon credits. A reduction in emissions entitles the entity

ANILKUMAR DWARKAPRASAD MODANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)(PREVIOUSLY DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)), VADODARA

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1572/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani The Dy.Cit बनाम/ A-17, Videocon Housing Colony Circle-2(1)(1) V/S. Chavaj, Bharuch 392 002 Vadodara (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Acnpm 0273 C अपीलाथ&/ (Appellant) '( यथ&/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hemant Suthar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26/12/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14, In Which The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao)”] Under Section 50C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] Was Confirmed Vide Assessment Order Dated 28/03/2016. Facts Of The Case: 2. The Assessee, An Individual Earning Income From Salaries, Trading In Shares & Securities, Capital Gains & Other Sources, Filed His Return Of Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani Vs. The Dcit Asst. Year : 2013-14

Housing Colony Circle-2(1)(1) v/s. Chavaj, Bharuch 392 002 Vadodara (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./PAN:ACNPM 0273 C अपीलाथ&/ (Appellant) '( यथ&/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Hemant Suthar, AR Revenue by : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 आदेश/O R D E R PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR

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

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

house under section 54F of the Act amounting to Rs.2,75,939/-. The AO, while 2 framing assessment, computed the capital gains by substituting the sale consideration received by the assessee with the stamp duty value of the property as per section 50C of the Act, and also took the value of cost of acquisition based on fair market value

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

1 ratio, which was matching with the share of the sale proceeds of the property in question. However, the Assessing Officer, while finalizing the assessment, invoked Section 50C of the Act with a view to substitute the sale consideration with the stamp duty value and restricted the deduction under Section 54 to only 50% of the investment

SHRI RAKESH AMBALAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(9),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 465/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

house property on 21.08.2009 for a consideration of Rs.8 Lakhs as per sale deed was very much present to the mind of the Assessing Officer and therefore invoking s.147 of the Act for substitution of ‘deemed sale consideration’ of Rs.13,17,000/- in place of Rs.8 Lakhs for the purposes of determination of capital gains with reference to Section 50C

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

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

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

house property has been reflected which was also shown as indirect income in the profit and loss account. Thus, loss was claimed at Rs.3,27,171 only. But since the assessee has not reflected any turnover during the year and there is no gross profit accruing, therefore, the salary expenses, telephone expenses and depreciation claimed on depreciable assets like vehicles

DEVINDRABEN RAJESHBHAI SHARMA,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(1)(1) VADODARA , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumarms. Suchitra Kamble

Housing Society Ltd. for a consideration of Rs.42,00,000/-. The assessee is an individual and has not filed any return of income for the year under consideration. It has been observed that the Stamp Valuation Authority has valued the property at a Devindraben Rajeshbhai Shahrma vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13 consideration of Rs..42,00,000/- thereby attracting

SIRHIND STEELS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-4, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 713/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Sirhind Steel Ltd., P.C.I.T-4, 7Th Floor, Shalin Building, Vs. Ambawadi, Nr. Nehru Bridge Corner, Ahmedabad. Ashram Road, Ahmedabad.

Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. reported in 20 taxmann.com 770 where it was held as under: As per section 2(11), the expression 'block of assets' means group of assets falling within the assets enumerated in clauses (a) and (b). Clause (a ) refers to tangible assets, including building, machinery, plant and clause (b) refers to intangible assets like copyright, know how, trade

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

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.

House, Vs. Circle-2(1)(2), Opp. Rajvansh Tower, Ahmedabad. Near Surel Bunglows, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad. PAN: AACCG1840P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Biren Shah, A.R Revenue by : Shri Deelip Kumar, Sr. D.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 28/01/2020 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

SUDAMA FARMS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four Appels are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Housing Society, Ahmedabad. B/h. Paraskunj Society, Satellite Road, Vs. Joadhpur, Ahmedabad – 380 015. [PAN – AADCS 9786 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Nupur Shah, AR Revenue by Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement 22.11.2024 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These four appeals are filed by four different Assessees against

SEJAL FARMS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four Appels are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Housing Society, Ahmedabad. B/h. Paraskunj Society, Satellite Road, Vs. Joadhpur, Ahmedabad – 380 015. [PAN – AADCS 9786 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Nupur Shah, AR Revenue by Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement 22.11.2024 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These four appeals are filed by four different Assessees against