24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. v. ITO

325 ITR 588High Court2010#5604 most cited
21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69ASection 131(1A)Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

gaarsection 65(b)section 181section 194qsection 193section 65b(4)section 158bb(1)retraction of statementsection 158bbsection 158b(b)section 65bsection 65

Judgments citing 24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. v. ITO

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7842/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…vs. ITO iii) 145 ITD 377 (Mum) (Trib) DCIT vs. Diven Dembla iv) 215 Taxman 11 (Del) (Mag) CIT vs. Delhi Housing & Finance Corporation v) 141 TTJ 123 (Jodh) ITO vs. Shiv Shakti Build Home (P) Ltd. vi) 24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. vs. ITO vii) 325 ITR 588 (P&H) CIT vs. Lal Singh viii) 36 ITR(T) 161 (Delhi - Trib.) DCIT vs GDA Finvest& Trade (P.) Ltd ix) ITA No. 4594/Del/2013 dated 07.07.2016 DCIT vs Gomati Consultants Pvt. Ltd x) 3 ITR(T) 372 (Patna) Gyan Ganga Ltd. Vs DCIT xi) 330 ITR 603 (Delhi) CIT v. Winstral Petrochemicals (P.) Ltd It was duly explained to the AO that transactions undertaken…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7841/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…vs. ITO iii) 145 ITD 377 (Mum) (Trib) DCIT vs. Diven Dembla iv) 215 Taxman 11 (Del) (Mag) CIT vs. Delhi Housing & Finance Corporation v) 141 TTJ 123 (Jodh) ITO vs. Shiv Shakti Build Home (P) Ltd. vi) 24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. vs. ITO vii) 325 ITR 588 (P&H) CIT vs. Lal Singh viii) 36 ITR(T) 161 (Delhi - Trib.) DCIT vs GDA Finvest& Trade (P.) Ltd ix) x) xi) ITA No. 4594/Del/2013 dated 07.07.2016 DCIT vs Gomati Consultants Pvt. Ltd 3 ITR(T) 372 (Patna) Gyan Ganga Ltd. Vs DCIT 330 ITR 603 (Delhi) CIT v. Winstral Petrochemicals (P.) Ltd It was duly explained to the AO that transactions undertaken…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7840/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…vs. ITO iii) 145 ITD 377 (Mum) (Trib) DCIT vs. Diven Dembla iv) 215 Taxman 11 (Del) (Mag) CIT vs. Delhi Housing & Finance Corporation v) 141 TTJ 123 (Jodh) ITO vs. Shiv Shakti Build Home (P) Ltd. vi) 24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. vs. ITO vii) 325 ITR 588 (P&H) CIT vs. Lal Singh viii) 36 ITR(T) 161 (Delhi - Trib.) DCIT vs GDA Finvest& Trade (P.) Ltd ix) ITA No. 4594/Del/2013 dated 07.07.2016 DCIT vs Gomati Consultants Pvt. Ltd x) 3 ITR(T) 372 (Patna) Gyan Ganga Ltd. Vs DCIT xi) 330 ITR 603 (Delhi) CIT v. Winstral Petrochemicals (P.) Ltd It was duly explained to the AO that transactions undertaken…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7838/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…vs. ITO iii) 145 ITD 377 (Mum) (Trib) DCIT vs. Diven Dembla iv) 215 Taxman 11 (Del) (Mag) CIT vs. Delhi Housing & Finance Corporation v) 141 TTJ 123 (Jodh) ITO vs. Shiv Shakti Build Home (P) Ltd. vi) 24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. vs. ITO vii) 325 ITR 588 (P&H) CIT vs. Lal Singh viii) 36 ITR(T) 161 (Delhi - Trib.) DCIT vs GDA Finvest& Trade (P.) Ltd ix) ITA No. 4594/Del/2013 dated 07.07.2016 DCIT vs Gomati Consultants Pvt. Ltd x) 3 ITR(T) 372 (Patna) Gyan Ganga Ltd. Vs DCIT xi) 330 ITR 603 (Delhi) CIT v. Winstral Petrochemicals (P.) Ltd It was duly explained to the AO that transactions undertaken…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -05 , DELHI

ITA 5521/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…vs. ITO iii) 145 ITD 377 (Mum) (Trib) DCIT vs. Diven Dembla iv) 215 Taxman 11 (Del) (Mag) CIT vs. Delhi Housing & Finance Corporation v) 141 TTJ 123 (Jodh) ITO vs. Shiv Shakti Build Home (P) Ltd. vi) 24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. vs. ITO vii) 325 ITR 588 (P&H) CIT vs. Lal Singh viii) 36 ITR(T) 161 (Delhi - Trib.) DCIT vs GDA Finvest& Trade (P.) Ltd ix) ITA No. 4594/Del/2013 dated 07.07.2016 DCIT vs Gomati Consultants Pvt. Ltd x) 3 ITR(T) 372 (Patna) Gyan Ganga Ltd. Vs DCIT xi) 330 ITR 603 (Delhi) CIT v. Winstral Petrochemicals (P.) Ltd It was duly explained to the AO that transactions undertaken…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5520/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…vs. ITO iii) 145 ITD 377 (Mum) (Trib) DCIT vs. Diven Dembla iv) 215 Taxman 11 (Del) (Mag) CIT vs. Delhi Housing & Finance Corporation v) 141 TTJ 123 (Jodh) ITO vs. Shiv Shakti Build Home (P) Ltd. vi) 24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. vs. ITO vii) 325 ITR 588 (P&H) CIT vs. Lal Singh viii) 36 ITR(T) 161 (Delhi - Trib.) DCIT vs GDA Finvest& Trade (P.) Ltd ix) x) xi) ITA No. 4594/Del/2013 dated 07.07.2016 DCIT vs Gomati Consultants Pvt. Ltd 3 ITR(T) 372 (Patna) Gyan Ganga Ltd. Vs DCIT 330 ITR 603 (Delhi) CIT v. Winstral Petrochemicals (P.) Ltd It was duly explained to the AO that transactions undertaken…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5517/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…vs. ITO iii) 145 ITD 377 (Mum) (Trib) DCIT vs. Diven Dembla iv) 215 Taxman 11 (Del) (Mag) CIT vs. Delhi Housing & Finance Corporation v) 141 TTJ 123 (Jodh) ITO vs. Shiv Shakti Build Home (P) Ltd. vi) 24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. vs. ITO vii) 325 ITR 588 (P&H) CIT vs. Lal Singh viii) 36 ITR(T) 161 (Delhi - Trib.) DCIT vs GDA Finvest& Trade (P.) Ltd ix) x) xi) ITA No. 4594/Del/2013 dated 07.07.2016 DCIT vs Gomati Consultants Pvt. Ltd 3 ITR(T) 372 (Patna) Gyan Ganga Ltd. Vs DCIT 330 ITR 603 (Delhi) CIT v. Winstral Petrochemicals (P.) Ltd It was duly explained to the AO that transactions undertaken…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5515/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…vs. ITO iii) 145 ITD 377 (Mum) (Trib) DCIT vs. Diven Dembla iv) 215 Taxman 11 (Del) (Mag) CIT vs. Delhi Housing & Finance Corporation v) 141 TTJ 123 (Jodh) ITO vs. Shiv Shakti Build Home (P) Ltd. vi) 24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. vs. ITO vii) 325 ITR 588 (P&H) CIT vs. Lal Singh viii) 36 ITR(T) 161 (Delhi - Trib.) DCIT vs GDA Finvest& Trade (P.) Ltd ix) x) xi) ITA No. 4594/Del/2013 dated 07.07.2016 DCIT vs Gomati Consultants Pvt. Ltd 3 ITR(T) 372 (Patna) Gyan Ganga Ltd. Vs DCIT 330 ITR 603 (Delhi) CIT v. Winstral Petrochemicals (P.) Ltd It was duly explained to the AO that transactions undertaken…

SHAHNAJ,NEAR BHERUDANJI WELL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 712/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Dr Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Shanaj Vs The Ito W/O Shri Aslam Khan Ward-2, Churu, Near Bherudan Ji Well,Ward No. 22 Churu Sardarshahar,Churu – 331 403 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Fpmps 3570 D

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 50CSection 54F

…ore surplus arising on its sale does not attract capital gains tax. There is plethora of decisions ratio of which held that the surplus arising on sale of agricultural lands was treated as exempt income as per sec. 10(1) of the Act. 1. CIT_v. Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588/ 8 taxmann.com 114(Punj. &Har.):- In this case, one late Pushpa Devi sold her agricultural land for Rs. 89,75,000 in the assessment year 1996-97. In response to notice under section 148, the return was filed by the legal heir on net taxable income of Rs. 37,000 and the long-term capital gain was shown as NIL. In order to claim that agriculture la…

KULWANT SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(5), MOHALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 395/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sharma, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 2(14)Section 54B

…cases: a) CIT vs K.R.N Prabhakaran HUF (Madras HC) as reported in 393 ITR 175 wherein it has been held as under: "Report of Inspector of Survey and Land Records more reliable than that of Income Tax Department Valuer" b) CIT vs Lal Singh & Ors as reported in 325 ITR 588 (P&H HC) "Land situated beyond 8 kms from municipal limits. Report of Tehsildar certified that the assessee's land was 8 kms away from the municipal limits. Report of the IT Inspector, without mentioning the Khasra number and without showing how the distance of the land was measured could not be accepted." c) CIT vs Dr. R. Rangarajan in Appeal N…

GUNVEER SINGH CHHABRA ,INDORE vs. THE PR CIT -1, INDORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 117/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Memebr & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Shubhash Jain, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 263

…than PWD department is authorized for the same. Apart from that the Tehsildar can be the competent authority and not the SDM as already pointed out by the assessee before the Ld.AO in view of the judgment passed in the matter of CIT vs. Lal Singh reported in 325 ITR 588 by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, wherein following observations were made: “We have heard the rival submissions. We have also perused the record. We are of the opinion that the AO erred in computing the long-term capital gain on the basis of the report of the Inspector and he did not believe the report of the Tehsildar. We agree with the…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. KUSHAL INFRAPROJECT INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5460/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)

…m the municipal limits 1. ACIT 33(1), Mumbai Vs. Alkesh Kantilal Patel, Mumbai on 3 April, 2017/ITA No. 4270/Mum/2015 2. Income-tax Officer 5(1), Indore Vs. Ashok Shukla [2012] 139 ITD 666 (Indore) 3. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Vs. Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF) [2017] 393 ITR 175 (Madras) II. Agricultural land would fall outside term ‘capital asset’ if it fell beyond 8 kms of municipal limits on date of publication of relevant CBDT notification: 5. Satya Dev Sharma Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur [2014] 46 t…

KAUSHAL INFRAPROJECT INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 5348/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)

…m the municipal limits 1. ACIT 33(1), Mumbai Vs. Alkesh Kantilal Patel, Mumbai on 3 April, 2017/ITA No. 4270/Mum/2015 2. Income-tax Officer 5(1), Indore Vs. Ashok Shukla [2012] 139 ITD 666 (Indore) 3. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Vs. Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF) [2017] 393 ITR 175 (Madras) II. Agricultural land would fall outside term ‘capital asset’ if it fell beyond 8 kms of municipal limits on date of publication of relevant CBDT notification: 5. Satya Dev Sharma Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur [2014] 46 t…

KAUSHAL INFRAPROJECT INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 4136/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)

…m the municipal limits 1. ACIT 33(1), Mumbai Vs. Alkesh Kantilal Patel, Mumbai on 3 April, 2017/ITA No. 4270/Mum/2015 2. Income-tax Officer 5(1), Indore Vs. Ashok Shukla [2012] 139 ITD 666 (Indore) 3. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Vs. Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF) [2017] 393 ITR 175 (Madras) II. Agricultural land would fall outside term ‘capital asset’ if it fell beyond 8 kms of municipal limits on date of publication of relevant CBDT notification: 5. Satya Dev Sharma Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur [2014] 46 t…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. KUSHAL INFRAPROJECT INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 2802/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)

…m the municipal limits 1. ACIT 33(1), Mumbai Vs. Alkesh Kantilal Patel, Mumbai on 3 April, 2017/ITA No. 4270/Mum/2015 2. Income-tax Officer 5(1), Indore Vs. Ashok Shukla [2012] 139 ITD 666 (Indore) 3. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Vs. Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF) [2017] 393 ITR 175 (Madras) II. Agricultural land would fall outside term ‘capital asset’ if it fell beyond 8 kms of municipal limits on date of publication of relevant CBDT notification: 5. Satya Dev Sharma Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur [2014] 46 t…

NANDKUMAR PHUTANE,THANE vs. ITO WD 3(1), THANE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 595/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

…(ITA No. 112/Nag/2012 and others vide order dated 22.3.2013)  CIT Vs. Satinder Pal Singh (33 DTR 281 dt. 7.1.2010)  Laukik Developers Vs. DCIT (105 ITD 657 dt. 10.7.2016)  CIT Vs. Smt. Debbie Alemao (331 ITR 59 dt. 9.9.2010)  CIT Vs. Lal Singh and others (325 ITR 588 dt. 20.11.2009) 5. In this regard we may refer to the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. P.C. Joshi and others (202 ITR 1017) as under:- 3. The Tribunal, while considering whether capital gains tax can be levied on the sale of this land by the assessees, has applied the tests laid down by the 3 Shri Nandkumar Kris…

SMT. KUNDAN SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 2061/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT_D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 69B

…Court in the case of Kishan Chand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) and Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd., 288 ITR 345 (Del.) and Judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Lal Singh 325 ITR 588 (P&H). The Ld. CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and material on record, deleted the addition of Rs.4,85,74,816/-, however, maintained the addition of Rs.50 lakhs. The findings of the Ld. CIT(A) in paras 4.3 to 4.7 of the Order are reproduced as under : “4.3. I have carefully considered the assessment order, the submissions made;…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. KUNDAN SINGH, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1797/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT_D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 69B

…Court in the case of Kishan Chand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) and Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SMC Share Broker Ltd., 288 ITR 345 (Del.) and Judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Lal Singh 325 ITR 588 (P&H). The Ld. CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and material on record, deleted the addition of Rs.4,85,74,816/-, however, maintained the addition of Rs.50 lakhs. The findings of the Ld. CIT(A) in paras 4.3 to 4.7 of the Order are reproduced as under : “4.3. I have carefully considered the assessment order, the submissions made;…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. SHRI. R.S. NATARAJ(HUF), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 194/BANG/2017[2013 - 2014]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2017

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A. K. Garodiaassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. B. R. Ramesh, Additional CIT
Section 2(14)Section 54B

…gned property at Sy. No.337, Bettahalasur Village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, the impugned agricultural land is 8.10 kms. The learned counsel for the assessee has further placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Courts (325 ITR 588) in which it has been held that the competent authority for issuing the distance certificate are revenue authorities. The learned counsel for the assessee further contended that in order to resolve the controversy with regard to the jurisdiction of the authorities for issuing the certificate, the assessee has approached the Assistant Executive En…

DCIT 9(2), MUMBAI vs. DHIREN P. DALAL, MUMBAI

In the result, both revenue’s appeal and assessee’s CO stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5164/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 10(1)Section 143(3)

…reported in [2011] 331 ITR 59 (Bom). Further reliance placed on the following decisions:- 13 "ी धीरेन पी दलाल Shri Dhiren P Dalal ITA 5164/Mum/2014 CO No. 15/Mum/2015 i) CIT v Nitish Rameshchandra Chordia [2015] 374 ITR 531 (Bom); ii) CIT v Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana); iii) ITO v Amrutilal B Shah [2013] 22 ITR (T) 668 (Mumbai – Trib): iv) Mrs. Sakunthal Vedachalam [2015] 369 ITR 558 (Mad); v) Supriya Kanwar v [2019] 149 ITD 1 (Jodhpur)(Trib)(TM). 10. On the issue of LTCG as raised in the Departmental appeal, he submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a very reasoned order after consider…

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2