116) and Delite Enterprises (P.) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), Mumbai

22 SOT 245Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#23684 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Judgments citing 116) and Delite Enterprises (P.) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), Mumbai

M/S. Great Fortune Investments and Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Nashik vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Nashik

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2325/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Hon’Ble Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2325/Pun/2017 निर्ाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Great Fortune Investments & The Assistant Commissioner Of Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax, Shop No.6, Rushiraj Heights, Near Cirlce-1, Nashik. Nmc Water Tank, Parijat Nagar, Mahatma Nagar, Nahik. Pan: Aaccg 6406 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket M Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri S.P.Walimbe - Dr Date Of Hearing 10/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 08/04/2022

Section 23Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24

…r computing the income from property in terms of section 22. The annual value determination shall be strictly in accordance with the provisions contained in section 23 as upheld by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Delite Enterprises (P) Ltd. V. ITO (2008) 22 SOT 245 (Mum). Accordingly, where the Rent Control Act is applicable only the standard rent is to be taken as the annual letting value. In the absence of standard rent the municipal ratable value is to be taken. Where the municipal ratable value of rent is less than actual rent, the actual rent shall be fair rental value for computing income from house pr…

Shri Ashok Kumar Mantri, Kishangarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kishangarh

In the result ground No

ITA 568/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay JhanwarFor Respondent: Shri J. C. Kulhari (JCIT)

…d be allowed. In support, reliance was placed on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in case of ACIT vs. Novel Enterprises [2012] reported in 22 taxmann.com 116) and Delite Enterprises (P.) Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), Mumbai [2008] reported in 22 SOT 245. 4. It was further submitted by the ld. AR that while filing the return of income, the assessee has wrongly claimed the interest paid on unsecured loan under the head “income from other sources”. However, during the course of assessment proceedings, it was submitted that the 3 Shri Ashok Kumar Mantri, Kishangarh Vs. ITO, Kishangarh same should be…

Pradeep Kumar Mohata, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

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

ITA 103/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT, D.R

Section 37Section 57Section 71(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, C/‘SMC’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C/“SMC” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी. चं" पूजार" लेखा सद"य , के सम" । BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.103/Mds./2017 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) Mr.Pradeep Kumar Mohata, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. 146,Sydenhams road, Corporate ward -5(4), Periyamet, Chennai 600 003. Wanaparthy Block, Chennai-34. PAN AETPM 2470 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Mr.Anandd Babunath , C.A अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Mr.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT, D.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of hearing : 22.06.2017 : 24…