KIRAN YADAV,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

section 50C to his notice. Further in the show cause notice proposed computation of capital gain was given. The assessee

LAL CHAND MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 5(2), JAIPUR

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

gains to the extent of investment in the new asset 4.4.2 Following the view held by the Hon'ble Tribunal, it may further be noted if the interpretation given by the appellant is accepted, then both section 45 nor section 50C would fail. Section 54F only provides the method of computation of capital

OMPRAKASH,DHOLPUR vs. ITO WARD 4 BHARATPUR, BHARATPUR

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes as indicated hereinabove\nOrder pronounced in the open court on\n17/01/2025

capital gains arising from its sale\nwere not chargeable to tax under section 45 - Held, yes [Paras 8, 9] [In favour of\nassessee]\"\nb. That THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY incase of Ashok\nChaganlalThakkarv. National Faceless Assessment Centre* [2024] 159 taxmann.com\n559 (Bombay) held that \"Section 2(14), read with sections 50C

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-5, JAIPUR vs. SHRI BANWARI LAL SHARMA, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

capital gain at Rs. 6,34,62,356/- was made in the hands of the assessee on protective basis by invoking the provisions of section 50C

SHRI BANWARI LAL SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-5, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

capital gain at Rs. 6,34,62,356/- was made in the hands of the assessee on protective basis by invoking the provisions of section 50C

NANAG RAM MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is partly allowed as indicated\nhereinabove

50C of the Act. It is\nfurther noted that AO incorrectly computed the Long-Term Capital Gain i.e.\nthe capital gain of Rs.71,80,672/- and deduction u/s 54F amounting to Rs\n27,50,000.00, after considering Id. CIT (A) order. As per the settled position\nof law, for the purpose of section

RAM SHRAN KATTA, 257, KATTA STREET, JAIN MANDIR WALI GALI, DURGAPURA, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Capital Gain w/s 50C. The mechanism is provided in the\nsection itself. If the assessee claims before Assessing Officer that the value adopted or\nassessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority under sub-section

RAM SHARAN KATTA, 257, KATTA STREET, JAIN MANDIR WALI GALI, DURGAPURA, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(4), JAIPUR, WARD-6(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Capital Gain w/s 50C. The mechanism is provided in the\nsection itself. If the assessee claims before Assessing Officer that the value adopted or\nassessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority under sub-section

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

Section 50C, is required to avoid miscarriage of\njustice. The legislature did not intend that the capital gain should be fixed

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Section 50C, is required to avoid miscarriage of\njustice. The legislature did not intend that the capital gain should be fixed

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

Section 50C, is required to avoid miscarriage of\njustice. The legislature did not intend that the capital gain should be fixed

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

Section 50C, is required to avoid miscarriage of\njustice. The legislature did not intend that the capital gain should be fixed

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Section 50C, is required to avoid miscarriage of\njustice. The legislature did not intend that the capital gain should be fixed

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

Section 50C, is required to avoid miscarriage of\njustice. The legislature did not intend that the capital gain should be fixed

METAL EXTRUSION INDIA LTD,JAIPUR vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Raovk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No.163/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2015-16 Cuke M/S. Metal Extrusion India Ltd. The Addl. Cit Vs. 36A, Suraj Nagar East, Civil Lines Circle – 1 Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aafcm 3410 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent

capital gains shall be computed on the basis of such consideration under section 48 of the Income-tax Act. The scope of section 50C

SHRI MANOJ KUMAR,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

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

50C, if the value ascertained as mentioned in sub-section (2) exceeds the value adopted, assessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority, such valuation of the authority would prevail, in other words, for the purpose of capital gains

SHRI RAM NARAIN YADAV,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3-2, JAIPUR

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

capital gain at Nil or Loss in the return of income and the information forwarded by the Investigation Wing regarding the sale of properties deemed full value consideration under section 50C

SHRI RAM NARAIN YADAV,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3-2, JAIPUR

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

capital gain at Nil or Loss in the return of income and the information forwarded by the Investigation Wing regarding the sale of properties deemed full value consideration under section 50C