138 DTR 229 (Guj) Moraliya B Balashai v. ITO

471 ITR 169High Court2019#18054 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 145B(1)Section 194LA Section 23 Section 28

Issues it is cited on

section 145b(1)section 194la section 145b section 23(1)section 57(iv)section 56(2)(viii)enhanced compensation section 145a compulsory acquisition section 34 section 57 section 56(2)

Judgments citing 138 DTR 229 (Guj) Moraliya B Balashai v. ITO

KRISHAN PAL SINGH HUF,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1268/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: the Ld CIT (Appeals).

For Appellant: Shri N. K. Agarwal, CA &For Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28

…part of the land acquisition compensation itself and not taxable, therefore, in light of Ghanshyam (HUF) v. CIT [2009] 224 CTR 522/315 ITR 1/182 Taxman 368 (SC). Learned counsel thereafter quoted [2016] 138 DTR 229 (Guj) Moraliya B Balashai v. ITO and [2019] 471 ITR 169 (Bom), Ruesh R.Shah v. Union of India and vehemently contended that the learned lower authorities action under challenge is hardly sustainable in law. 4. Mr.Jasnani on the other hand has quoted this tribunal's co-ordinate bench's order in Basweshwar Mallikarjun Bidwe v. ITO in ITA No.1012/PUN/2017 dated on 05.10.2020 in department's favour as und…

SAMADHAN KRUSHNA KATEKAR,RAIGAD vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, RAIGAD

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 426/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshaliनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Samadhan Krushna Katekar Vs. National 214, Narmada Krishna Niwas Faceless Dhutum, Jasai Uran – 400702 Assessment Maharashtra Centre Pan : Azrpk4713E Appellant Respondent

Section 250Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 96

…such an interest income is part of the land acquisition compensation itself and not taxable, therefore, in light of Ghanshyam(HUF) Vs. CIT [2009] 315 ITR 1 (SC). Learned counsel thereafter quoted [2016] 138 DTR 229 (Guj) Moraliya B Balashai Vs. ITO and [2019] 471 ITR 169 (Bom), Ruesh R.Shah Vs. Union of India and vehemently contended that the learned lower authorities action under challenge is hardly sustainable in law. 4. Mr.Jasnani on the other hand has quoted this tribunal‟s co- ordinate bench‟s order in Basweshwar Mallikarjun Bidwe Vs. ITO in ITA No.1012/PUN/2017 dated on 05.10.2020 in department‟s favour as…

KUSUM JAYRAM THAKUR,RAIGAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1332/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: S/Shri CH Naniwadekar &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 10(37)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 28Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.1332/PUN./2023 Assessment Year 2016-2017 Shri Kusum Jayram Thakur The Income Tax Officer, Dhutum, Post-Jasai, Ward-3, Trifred Tower, III Floor, Taluka-Uran, Dist.Raigad. vs. Opp. Khanda Colony, PIN – 410 206. New Panvel, Panvel – 410 206. Maharashtra. Maharashtra. PAN ASWPT3777H (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : S/Shri CH Naniwadekar & Kiran Sanmane For Revenue : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of Hearing : 01.05.2024 Date o…

AZIZUDDIN LATIPHODDIN KAZI L/H OF DECEASED LATIPHODDIN AJIMODDIN KAZI,LATUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, LATUR

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 835/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godaraआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.835/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Azizuddin Latiphoddin Kazi, The Income Tax Officer, L/H Of Deceased Latiphoddin Vs Ward-4, Latur. Ajimoddin Kazi, . Block No.71, Kazi Nivas, Dastagir Galli, Tal. Ahmedpur, Latur – 413515. Pan: Aynpk5231E Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri P P Kulkarni – Ar Revenue By Shri B.S.Rajpurohit - Dr Date Of Hearing 17/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18/08/2023

Section 234ASection 250Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 96

…such an interest income is part of the land acquisition compensation itself and not taxable, therefore, in light of Ghanshyam(HUF) Vs. CIT [2009] 315 ITR 1 (SC). Learned counsel thereafter quoted [2016] 138 DTR 229 (Guj) Moraliya B Balashai Vs. ITO and [2019] 471 ITR 169 (Bom), Ruesh R.Shah Vs. Union of India and vehemently contended that the learned lower authorities action under challenge is hardly sustainable in law. 4. Mr.Jasnani on the other hand has quoted this tribunal’s co- ordinate bench’s order in Basweshwar Mallikarjun Bidwe Vs. ITO in ITA No.1012/PUN/2017 dated on 05.10.2020 in department’s favour as…

SHRIHARI HANMANT NAVRANGE,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -3, LATUR

ITA 921/PUN/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Respondent: Shri Manojkumar Tripathi

Section 10(37)Section 147Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.921/PUN./2022 Assessment Year 2013-2014 The Income Tax Officer, Shrihari Hanmant Navrange, Ward – 3, Swati 1, Ahemadpur, Bhimnagar, Chambers, Opp. Dist. Latur – 413 515 Sports Complex, Ausa Maharashtra. vs., Road, Latur – 413 512. PAN AGPPN0725N Maharashtra (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.574/PUN./2023 Assessment Year 2013-2014 Shri Sabir Rafihyoddin Kazi, L/H of Deceased The Income Tax Officer, Rafihyoddin Vajiroddin Kazi Ward – 4, Swati Attar Galli Mali…