81 (Gauhati) (Mag.); ACIT v. Sunil Kumar Agarwal

7 ITD 392Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1984#12967 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Judgments citing 81 (Gauhati) (Mag.); ACIT v. Sunil Kumar Agarwal

MICHELLE Y. POONAWALLA,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 2013-14

ITA 665/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 22Section 23Section 24Section 263Section 57

…ely giving contentions below) still, same is deductible while computing income u/sec 22 r.ws 23 itself. For this legal proposition, I invite your kind attention towards the decision of Mumbai bench of ITAT in the case of "Verma Family Trust vs ITO reported at 7 ITD 392". AY 2017-18 “Vide e-filed submissions dated 21st June 2019, I clarified that I have claimed deduction of interest U/sec 24(b) amounting to Rs.80,47,414/- while computing income U/Sec. 22/23. Besides, I would like to clarify how I am legally justified while claiming deduction of interest paid U/sec. 24(b) which amounts to Rs. 80,47,414/-? I'm clari…

MICHELLE Y. POONAWALLA,PUNE vs. DCIT-CIR-7, PUNE , PUNE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 2013-14

ITA 664/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 22Section 23Section 24Section 263Section 57

…ely giving contentions below) still, same is deductible while computing income u/sec 22 r.ws 23 itself. For this legal proposition, I invite your kind attention towards the decision of Mumbai bench of ITAT in the case of "Verma Family Trust vs ITO reported at 7 ITD 392". AY 2017-18 “Vide e-filed submissions dated 21st June 2019, I clarified that I have claimed deduction of interest U/sec 24(b) amounting to Rs.80,47,414/- while computing income U/Sec. 22/23. Besides, I would like to clarify how I am legally justified while claiming deduction of interest paid U/sec. 24(b) which amounts to Rs. 80,47,414/-? I'm clari…

ACIT 23(3), MUMBAI vs. SHAILAJA S. HEMDEV, MUMBAI

ITA 2926/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Smt. Shailaja S. Hemdev 11/12Th Income Tax-23(3) Floor, Blair Room No.104, 1St Floor Apartments, Dr. Amberjkar Matru Mandir, Road, Bandra (W) Mumbai Mumbai – 400 050 Pan/Gir No.Abbph2668D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(b)Section 24Section 54

…Bejan Daver Vs. ITO, ITA No.2381/M/10 ii) CIT vs. R.J.Wood P.Ltd. (20 taxmann.com 599)(Del HC) iii) Sharmila Tagore Vs. JCIT(150 Taxman 4); iv) Realty Finance & Leasing Pvt. Ltd. (5 SOT 3448); v) ITO Vs. Gopichand Godhwani (1 SOT 374) vi) Varma Family Trust (7 ITD 392); and vii) Bombay Oil Industries Vs. DCIT (82 ITD 626) wherein it has been held that maintenance charges is deductible while computing annual value under the head income from house property. Respectfully following the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, we direct the AO to allow maintenance charges while computing annual letting value." Respectfully…

M.S.WELLNESS N. SOLUTIONS (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 10(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5112/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Kr. Agarwal, CITDR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(b)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 57

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण “डी” "यायपीठ अिधकरण "यायपीठ "यायपीठ, मुंबई "यायपीठ मुंबई मुंबई मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.5112/MUM/2017 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2012-2013) वष" M/s M S Wellness N Solutions Vs. DCIT-10(2)(2), Mumbai (India) Pvt. Ltd., 204-A, Kamanwala Chambers, New Udyog Mandir-2, Mogul Lane Mahim (W), Mumbai-400016 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : AACCM 8193 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respon…

SHAILAJA S. HEMDEV,MUMBAI vs. JCIT RG 19(3), MUMBAI

ITA 531/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha-DR
Section 143(3)Section 23(2)Section 254(1)

…Bejan Daver Vs. ITO, ITA No.2381/M/10 ii) CIT vs. R.J.Wood P.Ltd. (20 taxmann.com 599)(Del HC) iii) Sharmila Tagore Vs. JCIT(150 Taxman 4); iv) Realty Finance & Leasing Pvt. Ltd. (5 SOT 3448); v) ITO Vs. Gopichand Godhwani (1 SOT 374) vi) Varma Family Trust (7 ITD 392); and vii) Bombay Oil Industries Vs. DCIT (82 ITD 626) wherein it has been held that maintenance charges is deductible while computing annual value under the head income from house property. Respectfully following the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, we direct the AO to allow maintenance charges while computing annual letting value.” Respectfully…

BANGGREEN HOLDINGS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2005-06 is allowed

ITA 1999/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singh

For Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…um/2010 (Mum.-Trib.). (ii) CIT Vs. R.J. Wook (P.) Ltd. (20 taxmann.com 599) (Del.-HC). (iii) Realty Finance & Leasing (P.) Ltd. Vs. ITO (5 SOT 348) (Mum.-Trib.) (iv) Bombay Oil Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT (82 ITD 626) 9Mum.-Trib.) (v) Varma Family Trust Vs. ITO (7 ITD 392) (Mum.-Trib.) (vi) Sharmila Tagore Vs. JCIT (150 Taxman 4) (Mum.-Trib.) In support of his third preposition, the ld. AR of the assessee argued that the income from letting out is one of the sole objects of the assessee and accordingly rental income was assessable under the head “Business Income” and the corresponding expenses and depreciation are…

RANJEET D VASWANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 12(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3481/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Mr. Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Ms. R.M. Madhavi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 23

…(Del); M/s. Suman Didwania vs. ACIT (ITA No. 5805/Mum/2010) – ITAT ‘H’ Bench-Mumbai; ACIT vs. Mohanlal Rupesh Kumar (2001) 114 taxman 81 (Gauhati) (Mag.); ACIT vs. Sunil Kumar Agarwal (2012) 20 taxmann.com 330 (Lucknow); Varma Family Trust vs. 6th ITO (1984) 7 ITD 392 (Bom) and Realty Finance & Leasing (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2006) 5 SOT 348 (Mum). 6. The learned DR submits that the Act clearly mentions that while calculating the income from house property, only certain allowable deductions are to be allowed u/s 23 and 24 of the Act. What specific deductions are to be allowed in computing the income under the head in…

DHANO B VASWANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 12(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 3480/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Ms. R.M. Madhavi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 23

…(Del); M/s. Suman Didwania vs. ACIT (ITA No. 5805/Mum/2010) – ITAT ‘H’ Bench-Mumbai; ACIT vs. Mohanlal Rupesh Kumar (2001) 114 taxman 81 (Gauhati) (Mag.); ACIT vs. Sunil Kumar Agarwal (2012) 20 taxmann.com 330 (Lucknow); Varma Family Trust vs. 6th ITO (1984) 7 ITD 392 (Bom) and Realty Finance & Leasing (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2006) 5 SOT 348 (Mum). 6. The learned DR submits that the Act clearly mentions that while calculating the income from house property, only certain allowable deductions are to be allowed u/s 23 and 24 of the Act. What specific deductions are to be allowed in computing the income under the head in…

81 (Gauhati) (Mag.); ACIT v. Sunil Kumar Agarwal (7 ITD 392) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax