(1) Devendra Motilal Kothari v. DCIT

13 Taxmann 15Reported decision#22358 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,615 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Judgments citing (1) Devendra Motilal Kothari v. DCIT

Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Mumbai vs. ACIT Crn Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 5159/MUM/2010[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 55

…the computation of capital gains. In support of the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) the following judicial pronouncements were placed before us in support of the impugned disallowance: (1) Devendra Motilal Kothari vs. DCIT pronounced on 26/03/2010 reported in 13 Taxmann 15 (Mumbai) (2011) (2) Pradeep Kumar Harlalka vs. ACIT pronounced on 10/08/2011 47 SOT 204 (Mum) (2011) (3) Homi K. Bhabha vs. ITA pronounced on 28/09/2011 48 SOT 102 (Mum) (2011 ). It was submitted that the Tribunal in the above three cases after analyzing the issue and dealing with the various aspects of the issue u/s. 48 have sustained the disa…

Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Mumbai vs. ACIT Crn Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 5158/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 55

…the computation of capital gains. In support of the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) the following judicial pronouncements were placed before us in support of the impugned disallowance: (1) Devendra Motilal Kothari vs. DCIT pronounced on 26/03/2010 reported in 13 Taxmann 15 (Mumbai) (2011) (2) Pradeep Kumar Harlalka vs. ACIT pronounced on 10/08/2011 47 SOT 204 (Mum) (2011) (3) Homi K. Bhabha vs. ITA pronounced on 28/09/2011 48 SOT 102 (Mum) (2011 ). It was submitted that the Tribunal in the above three cases after analyzing the issue and dealing with the various aspects of the issue u/s. 48 have sustained the disa…

Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Mumbai vs. ACIT Crn Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 5157/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 55

…the computation of capital gains. In support of the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) the following judicial pronouncements were placed before us in support of the impugned disallowance: (1) Devendra Motilal Kothari vs. DCIT pronounced on 26/03/2010 reported in 13 Taxmann 15 (Mumbai) (2011) (2) Pradeep Kumar Harlalka vs. ACIT pronounced on 10/08/2011 47 SOT 204 (Mum) (2011) (3) Homi K. Bhabha vs. ITA pronounced on 28/09/2011 48 SOT 102 (Mum) (2011 ). It was submitted that the Tribunal in the above three cases after analyzing the issue and dealing with the various aspects of the issue u/s. 48 have sustained the disa…

(1) Devendra Motilal Kothari v. DCIT (13 Taxmann 15) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax