MUKESH ARVINDLAL VAKHARIA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(3), SURAT

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.491/Srt/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Mukesh Arvindlal Vakharia, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(3), C/O Arvind Silk Mills, Om Baug, Ashvini Surat. Kumar Road, Surat - 395006. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abcpv1682L

54E it should be equally applicable to S. 54EC also.” 8. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the Revenue, argued that assessee has purchased bond of Rs.50,00,000/- prior of date of sale of property, therefore exemption under section 54EC of the Act, should be disallowed. 9. We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through

SHRI ATUL K. PATEL,SURAT vs. PR. CIT-3, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed