Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 4 v. Manjulaben Parshottamdas Patel
High Court
23 Oct 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 4 v. Manjulaben Parshottamdas Patel
Date of order
23 Oct 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 4 v. Manjulaben Parshottamdas Patel, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Without recording separate reasons, this Tax Appeal is also therefore dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
C/TAXAP/1268/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1268 of 2018
=========================================PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4
VersusMANJULABEN PARSHOTTAMDAS PATEL
=========================================Appearance:
MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the APPELLANT(s) No. 1for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
=========================================CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
andHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UMESH TRIVEDI Date : 23/10/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
Appeal is filed by the Revenue challenging the judgment
of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 04.06.2018 raising following question for our consideration:
“Whether the Hon’ble Tribunal has erred on the facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs.13,97,290/- and subsequent enhancement of Rs.10,63,294/- to the addition by the CIT(A) on account of Long Term Capital Gains?”
Perusal of the judgment of the Tribunal would show that the Tribunal has relied upon its earlier decision in case of a co-owner of the property. Counsel for the Revenue candidly pointed out that in case of such co-owner Revenue’s Tax Appeal No.1204 of 2018 came to be dismissed by an order dated 08.10.2018. Without recording separate reasons, this Tax Appeal is also therefore dismissed.
(AKIL KURESHI, J.)
(UMESH TRIVEDI, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.