BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

6 results for “transfer pricing”+ Section 55Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai46Ahmedabad6Pune5Kolkata5Surat3Bangalore3Chennai3Cochin3Lucknow3Jaipur2Chandigarh1Delhi1Cuttack1Raipur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)7Long Term Capital Gains5Addition to Income5Section 2633Section 56(2)(vii)3Section 55A3Section 482Section 143(1)2Section 143(2)

SHRI NEERAV SHAILESH PAREKH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 535/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 48

price is taken at Rs.14,616/- instead of Rs.8,605/- disclosed by the assessee. Thus, the LTCG worked out at Rs.29,01,710/- instead of Rs.15,98,578/- disclosed by the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.29,01,710/- as LTCG. The Assessing Officer also made addition of Rs.1,72,635/- towards income from other sources

THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(12),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI CAWAS DARASHA KARAKA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 499/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed
2
Section 69A2
Capital Gains2
Deduction2
ITAT Ahmedabad
08 Apr 2025
AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT\nMS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nI.T.A. No. 499/Ahd/2018\n(Assessment Year: 2013-14)\nIncome-Tax Officer,\nWard-3(3)(12),\nAhmedabad\n(Appellant)\nVs.\nLate Shri Cawas Darasha\nKaraka, Legal Heir M/s.\nCawas Karaka Trust,\n22, Teen Murti Bungalows,\nNr. Devang Bungalows,\nThaltej, Ahmedabad-380054\n[PAN : AGSPK 9616 L]\n(Respondent)\nAppellant by :\nShri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &\nShri Parimalsinh H. Parmar, ARs\nRespondent by:\nAdjournment applica

For Appellant: \nShri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: \nAdjournment application filed
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 48Section 49(1)Section 55(2)(a)Section 69A

price paid or promised, or of\nmoney, a share of crops, service or any other thing of value, to be rendered\nperiodically or on specified occasions to the transfer by the transferee, who\naccepts the transfer on such terms.\n2.\nIt is most humbly submitted that the land admeasuring 3 acres and\n33 gunthas was demised by the said

HARSHADKUMAR HARGOVANDAS PATEL,KALOL vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 125/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 55A

55A of the Act provides a clear\nmechanism for the Assessing Officer to make a reference to the Valuation\nOfficer if he is not satisfied with the value adopted by the assessee. However,\nin the present case, the Assessing Officer did not invoke this provision and\ninstead determined the FMV arbitrarily on the basis of a single sale instance,\nwithout

KALPTARU INFRABUILD,AHMEDABAD vs. PCIT-3 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 750/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 55ASection 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(x)

55A. The assessee submitted that Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) was not applicable as it applied only to Kalptaru Infrabuild vs. PCIT Asst.Year –2017-18 - 3– individuals and HUFs, and not to partnership firms, and cited relevant case law in support. Even if the provision was deemed applicable, the AO had complied with his legal duty by referring

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(3),, AHMEDABAD vs. KETABEN JANAKBHAI PATEL,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 103/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Trivedi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

price of Rs. 8,15,000/-. The purchase deed was registered on 19.12.2006. The said plot was sold by the assessee for a consideration of Rs. 2,15,00,000/- along-with two other persons. Stamp duty of Rs.24,44,500/- was paid on such transaction. The Assessee's share was of 60%. The conveyance deed was executed

MR. JOBANJI THAKOR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO. WARD-3(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 264/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपील सं/ITA No.264/Ahd/2019\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16\nMr. Jobanji Thakor\nThe ITO\nF-40, Abugiri Society\nबनाम / Ward-3(2)(2)\nTal. Daskroi, Jagatpur\nv/s.\nAhmedabad\nAhmedabad - 382 470\nस्थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AKNPT 2930 M\n(अपीलार्थी/ Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)\nAssessee by:\nShri Mehul K. Patel, AR\nRevenue by :\nShri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR\nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date of

For Appellant: \nShri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: \nShri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)

55A of the Act, specifically from the\nDistrict Valuation Officer (DVO) vide report numbers D.T. 26/12/2017 and\nNo. 6 (25)/VO-1/2017-18/873. The DVO had determined the cost of the land\nas on 01.04.1981 at Rs.5,96,000/-, and after applying the indexation benefit,\nthe indexed cost was computed at Rs.15,25,760/-. The assessee reiterated that\nthe valuation had been