2015) (iii) Atul G. Puranik vs. ITO (132 ITD 499) (iv) ITO v. Hari Om Gupta (

155 TTJ 294Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#13535 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Judgments citing 2015) (iii) Atul G. Puranik vs. ITO (132 ITD 499) (iv) ITO v. Hari Om Gupta (

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 462/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35(1)(i)Section 43BSection 56(2)(x)Section 80J

…) (ITAT Ahmedabad) (ix) ACIT vs. Nadir Nazarali Dhanani (ITA No. 100/Mum/2013) (ITAT Mum); (x) Kumarpal Mohanlal Jain vs. ITO (ITA No. 7231/Mum/2010) (ITAT Mum); (xi) ITO vs. Hari Om Gupta (45 ITR 137); (xii) ITO -vs.- Pradeep Steel Re-rolling Mills (P.) Ltd (155 TTJ 294). 9 Britannia Industries Limited b) The second proposition argued by the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the provisions of section 56(2)(x) of the Act are not applicable to leasehold rights held in land and building at Ranjangaon, which were acquired in F.Y. 2016-17 relevant to A.Y. 2017-18, when the provisions was not existing in the Stat…

ACIT-21(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S.SANTOSH ENTERPRISE, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5887/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Santosh Enterprises Income Tax-21(3) 1, Manshanti Chs Ltd., Room No.209, 2Nd Floor D.L.Vaidya Road Piramal Chambers Dadar (W) Lalbaug, Mumbai – 12 Mumbai – 400 028 Pan/Gir No. Aaafs1100K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 43C

…lopment rights in the land is the subject matter of the agreement. In such a scenario, the provisions of section 43CA do not apply. The appellant has relied upon the judgments of Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in cases of ITO vs. Pradeep Steel Re-Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. (155 TTJ 294), ITO vs. Hemant Tandel (44 CCH 55) and Shri Atul G. Puranik in ITA No. 3051/M/10, wherein it has been held that land or building or both does not include leasehold right in the land. Alternatively, It is also argued during the appellate proceedings that the stamp duty value is determined at Rs. 35.47 crore. The appellant has received Rs. 18 cror…

ITO 22(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. LILADHAR R. TANDEL, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas Cross

ITA 959/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Amarjit Singh, Judicil Member

For Appellant: Shri. Hari S. RahejaFor Respondent: Shri. V. Jenardhanan

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…ay High Court in case of Greenfield Hotels & Estates (P) Ltd., 77 Taxman.com 308. Furthermore, in the following judicial pronouncements, the Tribunal have taken this view:-  Atul G. Puranik vs. ITO (132 ITD 499 (Mum))  Pratap Steel Re-rolling Mills P Ltd - 155 TTJ 294 (Mum)  ACIT vs. Nadir Nazarali Dhanani (ITA No. 100/Mum/2013 dated 09.10.2015)  Kumarpal Mohanlal Jain vs. ITO (ITA No. 7231/Mum/2010 dated 30.11.2015)  ITO vs. Hari Om Gupta (45 ITR (Trib) 137)  ITO vs. Pradeep Steel Re-Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. (155 TTJ 294)  Kancast P. Ltd. vs. ITO (68 SOT 110) (Pune)  M/s. Heatex Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACI…

AEGIS LOGISTICS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee,in part

ITA 2671/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं./Ita/2671/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2006-07 Aegis Logistics Limited Acit, Circle-1(1) 403, Peninsula Chambers, Morarjee Mills Mumbai. Compound,G.K. Marg, Lower Parel(W) Vs. Mumbai-400 013. Pan:Aaaca 3302 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri S.K. Mishra-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Percy Pardiwala/Ms. Vasanti Patel सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09/02/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 15/03/2017 लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनु सार/ Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा अनुसार लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनु अनु सार सार Challenging The Order,Dated 15/12/2010, Of The Cit (A)-1 Mumbai The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Chemicals,Filed Its Return Of Income On 28/11/2006,Disclosing A Total Income Of Rs. 14.75 Crores.A Revised Return Was Filed On 28/03/2008 Reducing The Long-Term Capital Loss From The Returned Income.The Assessing Officer(Ao)Completed The Assessment,U/S.143(3)Of The Act On 29/12/2008, Determin - Ing Its Income At Rs. 14. 85 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala/Ms. Vasanti PatelFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Mishra-DR

Section 10Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e equated with the ownership of the land and, therefore, the deemed provisions of section 50C, cannot be applied in case of transfer of lease hold rights. He has relied upon the following decisions:- i) ITO v/s Pradeep Steel Re-rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., [2013] 155 TTJ 294 (Mum.); ii) Atul G. Pauranik v/s ITO, ITA no.3051/Mum./2010, order dated 13th May 2011; and iii) Shri Hemant R. Tandel, ITA no.1934, 1835, 1935, 1836, 1941, 1837/Mum./2012, order dated 16th April 2015 14. We have considered the rival contentions as well as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that what is transferred by the assess…

ITO 22(3)(2), NAVI MUMBAI vs. MEGHI PARBAT PATEL, NAVI MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6390/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-22(3)(2) Shri Meghji Parbat Patel, 3Rd Floor, Room No.307, Prop. G.D.Enterprises, बनाम/ Tower No.6, Vashi Rly Flat B-5, Plot No.46, Vs. Station Complex, Vashi, Anand Niketan Chs, Navi Mumbai Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400705 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Afmpp7902H

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…ITA No. 100/Mum/2013 dated 09.10.2015) (ii) Kumarpal Mohanlal Jain vs. ITO (ITA No. 7231/Mum/2010 dated 30.11.2015) (iii) Atul G. Puranik vs. ITO (132 ITD 499) (iv) ITO vs. Hari Om Gupta (45 ITR (Trib) 137) (v) ITO vs. Pradeep Steel Re-Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. (155 TTJ 294) 7 Shri Meghji Parbat Patel ITA Nos.6390/Mum/2014 vi) Kancast P. Ltd. vs. ITO (68 SOT 110) 5.2 Per contra, the learned D.R. for Revenue strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and contended that section 50C of the Act is a special provision for computing capital gains in certain cases and would include not only land as such but…

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1545/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. NC Sawain, CIT DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―I-2‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hero MotoCorp Limited, JCIT, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi PAN: AAACH0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, M/s. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT, M/s. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Page 2 of 484 New Delhi Vs. Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Hero Moto Corp. D…

FARID GULMOHAMED,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT) 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 5136/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainshri Farid Gulmohamed Income Tax Officer C/O. M/S. B.C. Dastur & Co. (Internationla Tax) 3(1) Vs. Reliance Bldg., 3Rd Floor Schindia House, Ballard Estate 269, D.N. Road, Mumbai Mumbai 400038 Pan - Aefpg3094K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…ITA No. 100/Mum/2013 dated 09.10.2015) (ii) Kumarpal Mohanlal Jain vs. ITO (ITA No. 7231/Mum/2010 dated 30.11.2015) (iii) Atul G. Puranik vs. ITO (132 ITD 499) (iv) ITO vs. Hari Om Gupta (45 ITR (Trib) 137) (v) ITO vs. Pradeep Steel Re-Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. (155 TTJ 294) vi) Kancast P. Ltd. vs. ITO (68 SOT 110) 5.2 Per contra, the learned D.R. for Revenue strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and contended that section 50C of the Act is a special provision for computing capital gains in certain cases and would include not only land as such but also leasehold rights in land. 5.3.1 We have heard t…