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

68,600/-, the assessee did not dispute the same but requested that the matter be referred to the Departmental Valuation Officer. The value of land, as per DVO’s report, turned out to Rs.2,75,14,000/-. It was in this backdrop that the Assessing Officer adopted the sale consideration (being 50% of the total sale consideration) at Rs.1

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

section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. Grievances raised by the parties, which are interconnected and which we will take up together, are as follows:- Grounds of appeal:- ITA No. 464/Ahd/2016 – by Department ITA Nos. 464 & 513/Ahd/2016 ITO vs. Vinodbhai J Patel -cross Assessment Year : 2012-13 Page

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

section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. Grievances raised by the parties, which are interconnected and which we will take up together, are as follows:- Grounds of appeal:- ITA No. 464/Ahd/2016 – by Department ITA Nos. 464 & 513/Ahd/2016 ITO vs. Vinodbhai J Patel -cross Assessment Year : 2012-13 Page

SHRI ARVINDBHAI POPATLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-13(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Memebr

54F of the Act become redundant. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed being infructuous. 11. The next issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 12,63,000/- made under section 68

VINODCHANDRA T PARIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 457/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014 Vinodchandra T. Parikh, I.T.O, 31, Shail, Vs. Ward-2(1)(2), Opp. Madhusudan House, Ahmedabad. Navrangpura, Ahmedabad.

54F of the I. Tax Act & initiated penalty proceedings u/s 27l(l)(c). The addition confirmed by the learned CIT(A) deserves to be deleted. The same be deleted now. 2. The Learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not admitting the additional ground and also not considering additional ground raised during the course of Appellate Proceedings

SMT. MINAL NAYAN SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR, CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2014-15 on 27.12.2016 by the DCIT,Cirete-3(3), Ahmedabad thereby, accepting your returned income i.e. Rs 1,26,94,100/- as per Return of income filed on 23.04.2015. On examination of records, it is noticed that your father, Late Pramodbhai Ratilal Shah, had entered into

SHRI KIRIT N. NAGAR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1),, BARODA

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

68 of the Act in the hands of the assessee. Further, the AO observed that the assessee sold immovable property for " 1,51,75,000/- on 23-07-2010 as per the value assessed by the Stamp Value Authority, however, the assessee submitted that the property was sold for " 84 lakhs. The AO rejected the assessee’s contention and added

PRAVINSINH BHAWANSINH VAGHELA,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

54F of the Act of ₹26,74,471/- was disallowed for want of supporting documents. In addition, an amount of ₹36,00,000/- stated to be gifts received from the assessee’s son and daughter was treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68

SHRI RAMESHBHAI AMTHABHAI DESAI,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing Of The Appeal.” Total Tax Effect 67,053”

68 for cash deposit in bank account (" 1,10, 000/-) and thirdly, difference in salary income (" 7000). The addition in respect of claim of section 54F

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

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)

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

HETA RAWAL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI SHAILESH INDUPRASAD RAWAL,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(3) of the Act on 29.01.2016 at a total income of Rs.1,67,53,350/-. 3. Aggrieved with the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee had filed an appeal before the first appellate authority which was decided by the Ld. CIT(A) vide the impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed

SHITAL PIYUSHKUMAR PATEL,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

54F OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 – CAPITAL GAINS – EXEMPTION OF, IN CASE OF INVESTMENT IN RESIDENTIAL HOUSE – ASSESSEE INVESTING EARNEST MONEY IN SPECIFIED ASSETS BEFORE DATE OF TRANSFER – WHETHER AMOUNT SO INVESTED QUALIFIES FOR EXEMPTION CIRCULAR : NO. 359 [F. NO. 207/8/82-IT(A-II)], DATED 10-5-1983 1. Section 54E provides for exemption of long-term capital gains

TRUE SPARROW SYSYTEM PVT. LTD,VADODARA vs. THE PR. CIT-2, VADODARA

In the result, we hold that the Ld

68 (SC) 24 observed as under: “This being the case, it is obvious that the beneficial purpose of the exemption contained in Section 3(1)(b) must be given full effect to, the line of authority being applicable to the facts of these cases being the line of authority which deals with beneficial exemptions as opposed to exemptions generally

THE JT. CIT, RANGE-9, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI NIKETAN KISHORCHANDRA PATEL,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

section 2(13) of the Act and therefore liable to be assessed under the head "Income from Business & Profession". 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by not appreciating that the land in question was held by the assessee as current assets in A Ys 2009-10 and 2010-11. 6. Cn the facts

PUNITA KALPESH PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

68,32,645/- to Rs. 29,29,03,143/- for the mutual fund portion. I.T.A No. 2054/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 3 Punita Kalpesh Patel Vs. ACIT 3. Aggrieved against the assessment order the assessee filed an appeal. The appellant contends that section 94(7) applies only to exempt dividends (i.e. Rs.10,00,000/- for shares and the full

YASH ASHITBHAI VASHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1476/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Yash Ashitbhai Vashi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ E/1, Pranav Apartment Ward-1, V/S. Shreyas Tekra International Taxation Ambawadi Ahmedabad-380 014 Ahmedabad – 380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aiipv 9386 Q (अपीलाथ&/ Appellant) ('( यथ&/ Respondent) Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24 /02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26 /02/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

68,000 from his bank account in purchasing the new house and that the purchase was made in his mother’s name for sentimental reasons. However, the CIT(A) rejected this argument, noting that mere transfer of funds does not establish ownership, and the assessee failed to furnish any documentary evidence proving joint ownership or a legal right over

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

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

54F). 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in holding that registration of the Bunakhat was not necessary even though as per clause (aa) inserted in sub-section (1) of the section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 by the Registration (Gujarat Amendment) Act, 1982, instruments which purport or operate to affect any contracts for transfer

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

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

54F). 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in holding that registration of the Bunakhat was not necessary even though as per clause (aa) inserted in sub-section (1) of the section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 by the Registration (Gujarat Amendment) Act, 1982, instruments which purport or operate to affect any contracts for transfer