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.

81 results for “section 68”+ Section 211clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi609Karnataka527Mumbai353Bangalore182Chennai149Hyderabad120Jaipur100Pune88Ahmedabad81Kolkata80Chandigarh54Calcutta51Raipur45Telangana33Indore28Cochin28Guwahati20Rajkot20Surat19Lucknow16Visakhapatnam15SC8Jodhpur8Dehradun5Kerala5Rajasthan5Nagpur5Allahabad4Jabalpur4Varanasi4Orissa3Patna2Panaji2Amritsar2Agra1Cuttack1Andhra Pradesh1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Addition to Income60Disallowance45Section 143(3)43Section 6840Section 80I40Section 2(15)38Section 1131Deduction28Exemption22Section 43B

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1277/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

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

Section 250Section 68

section 68 of the Act. As per amended provisions, the assessee IT(SS)A No. 73/Ahd/2025 and others Group Appeals - HK Ispat Pvt Ltd Asst.Year : 2015-16 to 2021-2022 - 8– needs to explain source to source of sum credited to his bank account, the appellant submitted that such amended provisions not applicable to current year, thus the appellant

H K ISPAT PVT. LTD.,PANCHMAHAL vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1392/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad

Showing 1–20 of 81 · Page 1 of 5

21
Section 14A20
Section 14820
18 Mar 2026
AY 2021-22

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

Section 250Section 68

section 68 of the Act. As per amended provisions, the assessee IT(SS)A No. 73/Ahd/2025 and others Group Appeals - HK Ispat Pvt Ltd Asst.Year : 2015-16 to 2021-2022 - 8– needs to explain source to source of sum credited to his bank account, the appellant submitted that such amended provisions not applicable to current year, thus the appellant

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA, VADODARA vs. HK ISPAT PVT LTD, GODHRA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2014–15 to 2021–

ITA 1278/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

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

Section 250Section 68

section 68 of the Act. As per amended provisions, the assessee IT(SS)A No. 73/Ahd/2025 and others Group Appeals - HK Ispat Pvt Ltd Asst.Year : 2015-16 to 2021-2022 - 8– needs to explain source to source of sum credited to his bank account, the appellant submitted that such amended provisions not applicable to current year, thus the appellant

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. GTC OILFIELDS SERVICES P. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the 8 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 971/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Royappeal No. Ay Appellant Respondent Sn M/S. Gtc Oilfields Services P. Ltd., 2009-10 The Dcit, 61, New York Tower, A-Block, It(Ss)A Nos. 1-3 2010-11 Central Circle 1(4), Thaltej Char Rasta, S.G. Road, 314 To 316/Ahd/2019 2014-15 Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380054 Pan : Aaacg 8684 P The Dcit, M/S. Gtc Oilfields Services P. Ltd.

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

section 68 of the Act, would lead to the double addition which is unwanted under the provisions of law.” 13. In addition to the reasons given above, the Tribunal also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M.R. Shah Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, reported in 97 taxmann.com 211

SMT. AMISHI SWAPNIL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1923/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1923/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 Smt Amishi Swapnil Shah, Income Tax Officer, 11, Gokul Row House, Ward-5(2) (3), Vs. Nr.Shyamal Row House, Ahmedabad. Satellite, Ahmedabad-380015 Pan: Baxps8977C

Section 147Section 148Section 68

section 68 can not be made, is also not tenable as the Hon’ble Kerala High Court, in a latest decision in the case of Smt. Indira Rani-vs- CIT reported in 211

AANYA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2069/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Pipara, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 44Section 44ASection 68

section 68 of the Act. He further observed that the assessee has alleged payment of interest on these loans which were termed as bogus, therefore, the expenses claimed in the shape of interest deserves to be disallowed. He disallowed such interest expenditure and made addition of Rs.3,01,277/-. 5. Dissatisfied with the additions, the assessee carried the matter

ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR vs. LEELA NEWS NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED, BHAVNAGAR, GUJARAT

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1714/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

211 (Guj.)];  CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd. [(2013) 30 taxmann.com  328 (Del.)]; to argue that where documentary evidences are submitted and identity, credit worthiness and genuineness are established, no addition can be made under section 68

M/S. SHRI RANG INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 665/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 68

68 of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 6. As regards additional ground, the Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer while reopening the assessment has reviewed the original assessment order and, therefore, the review of the original assessment

DILIPKUMAR PASHABHAI PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1095/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1095 & 1096/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C/Sf 211 Pushp Business Campus Ward-3(3)(5) V/S. Nr. Vastral Cross Road Ahmedabad Sp Ring Road Vastral Ahmedabad – 382 418 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Atrpp 9632 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jinesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Jinesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 251Section 68

211 Pushp Business Campus Ward-3(3)(5) v/s. Nr. Vastral Cross Road Ahmedabad SP Ring Road Vastral Ahmedabad – 382 418 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN:ATRPP 9632 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Jinesh Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश

DILIPKUMAR PASHABHAI PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1096/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1095 & 1096/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C/Sf 211 Pushp Business Campus Ward-3(3)(5) V/S. Nr. Vastral Cross Road Ahmedabad Sp Ring Road Vastral Ahmedabad – 382 418 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Atrpp 9632 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jinesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Jinesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 251Section 68

211 Pushp Business Campus Ward-3(3)(5) v/s. Nr. Vastral Cross Road Ahmedabad SP Ring Road Vastral Ahmedabad – 382 418 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN:ATRPP 9632 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Jinesh Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश

ZYDUS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CADILA HEALTHCARE LTD.),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/AHD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 162/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 92BSection 92C

211, Section 92E, Section 92D, Section 43CA). Had the intent of the legislature been to include the sixtieth day while computing the period of limitation, it would have expressly mentioned 'on or before'. In the absence of any such specific words it may riot be apposite to read the term 'before' in Section 92CA

THE DY. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. MANGALALAXMI INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Department’s appeal is dismissed and Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1558/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri B.P. Shrivastava, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 68

68 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. 5. By virtue of the impugned order, the learned CIT(A) held that the Assessing Officer had not issued and served any mandatory notice in the case of the assessee before proceeding to complete the reassessment under section 148 of the Act. This brings the Department

SHRENO LIMITED,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NOW CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 251/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Tribunal Against The Order Of Learned Cit(A)-2, Vadodara, Dated 19.11.2015 Passed For A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Are Not In Consonance With Rule 8 Of Itat Rules, They Are Descriptive & Argumentative In Nature. In Brief, In The First Fold Of Grievance, Assessee Pleaded That The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Required To Be Made U/S. 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1962 Read With Rule 8D Of The Income Tax Rules. Learned Counsel For The

Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 14A

68,485 4,75,48,314 65,22,20,000 47,76,37,580 31 -Mar-08 34,50,41,

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1 NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 311/Ahd/2016 2010-11 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 2. 2176/Ahd/2016 2011-12 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., “Trishul”, 3Rd Floor, Circle-1(1)(1) Opp. Samtheshwar Ahmedabad. Mahadev Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aaacu2414K 3. 2173/Ahd/2016 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 4. 165/Ahd/2017 2012-13 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 5. 287/Ahd/2017 2012-13 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 6-7 520 & 2013-14 Axis Bank Limited, D.C.I.T., 521/Ahd/2018 & Ahmedabad. Circle-1(1)(1) 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K 8-9 604 & 605/ 2013-14 D.C.I.T., Axis Bank Limited, Ahd/2018 & Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad. 2014-15 Ahmedabad. Pan: Aaacu2414K

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Smt. Urvashi Shodhan, and Shri Parin Shah,For Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, CIT.DR
Section 14A

211 (3c) of the Companies Act, 1956, till such time the Central Government prescribes AS, the AS issued by ICAI in the meantime is deemed relevant AS and is binding to the assessee for preparation of financial statements. 4.3 It is further submitted that section 145(3] empowers the Department to reject the books only

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), BARODA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1864/AHD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

68,23,111 /- claimed by the Company as deduction u/s 80IA of the Income Tax Act was allowed as deduction in the original assessment, however the Ld. A.O. in re- assessment order has disallowed the Company's claim of aforesaid deduction wrongly alleging that the company was merely a sub contractor and not -a developer of infrastructure projects. Furthermore

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, RANGE-4,, BARODA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 225/AHD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

68,23,111 /- claimed by the Company as deduction u/s 80IA of the Income Tax Act was allowed as deduction in the original assessment, however the Ld. A.O. in re- assessment order has disallowed the Company's claim of aforesaid deduction wrongly alleging that the company was merely a sub contractor and not -a developer of infrastructure projects. Furthermore

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SANJAY PRATAPRAI MEHTA, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 897/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar P Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri
Section 10(38)Section 271(1)(c)

68 of the Act for the sale consideration received from sale of equity shares of M/s SAL and addition for estimated brokerage expenses has been dealt by the Co-ordinate Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Dipesh Ramesh Vardhan V/s DCIT (supra) and the same is squarely applicable on the instant appeals. ******************* DCIT vs. Sanjay Prataprai Mehta Asst.Year

PAWAN SATYNARAYAN JALAN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2)., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 182/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 158B

211 Taxman 453, 352 ITR (493)] & Kerala High Court in the case of E.N. Gopakumar vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) [2016] 75 Taxmann.com 215 (ker.) wherein Courts held that assessments in a search case can be concluded against interest of assessee including making additions even without any incriminating material being available against assessee in search under section

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2)., AHMEDABAD vs. PAWAN SATYNARAYAN JALAN, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 204/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 158B

211 Taxman 453, 352 ITR (493)] & Kerala High Court in the case of E.N. Gopakumar vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) [2016] 75 Taxmann.com 215 (ker.) wherein Courts held that assessments in a search case can be concluded against interest of assessee including making additions even without any incriminating material being available against assessee in search under section

SMT. RESHMIBEN P. KANUGO,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1)(3), VADODARA

In the result appeal filed the assessee is allowed

ITA 2131/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2131/Ahd/2018 2014-15 Smt. Reshmiben P. Income Tax Kanugo, Officer, 26, Jawahar Society, Nr. Ward 3(1)(3), Bakrawadi, R.V. Desai Vadodara. Road, Vadodara, Gujarat-390001. Pan: Azupk6721B 2. 2132/Ahd/2018 2014-15 Shri Alpesh P. Income Tax Kanugo(Huf), Officer, 26, Jawahar Society, Ward 3(1)(3), Nr. Bakrawadi, Ahmedabad. R.V. Desai Road, Vadodara-390001. Pan: Aajha5173P 3. 2133/Ahd/2018 2014-15 Shri Parasmal B. Kanugo Income Tax Officer, (Huf), Ward-3(1)(3), 26, Jawahar Society, Nr. Ahmedabad. Bakrawadi, R.V. Desai Road, Vadodara, Gujarat-390001. Pan: Aakhp0126Q

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Singh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 68

211 0 0 Textiles Ltd. 2 Do 10.04.2013 32574 16.09.2011 396 0 0 3 Do 25.09.2013 3110921 16.09.2011 25762 31,60,046 26,369 0 31,33,677 4. The Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings disallowed the claim of exemption of long term capital gains, claimed by the assessee on the sale of shares of M/s Shri