Appellant in Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation v. ZTE Corporation

392 ITR 18High Court2017#9248 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Judgments citing Appellant in Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation v. ZTE Corporation

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NEW DELHI vs. MANJIT SINGH BAIDWAN

ITA/59/2023HC Punjab & Haryana09 May 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Section 54F

…ITA-59-2023 (O& 108 IN TH THE COMMI TAXATION) MANJIT SIN CORAM: H H Present M f SANJEEV P CM-5811-CII- A appeal is allow CM-5812-CII- E Main case 1. The pre wherein a s b ju L &M) HE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA CHANDIGAR ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( )-II, NEW DELHI Vs. NGH BAIDWAN **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SU **** Mrs. Urvashi Dhugga, Sr. Standi for the appellant. **** RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) -2023 Application for condonation of wed and accordingly delay is con -2023 Exemption application is allowed esent appeal assails the order pas n the Tribunal ha…

MR.RAHIL MAHESH KUMAR NIZAMUDDIN ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 892/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri K.Y. Ningoji Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.R

Section 48Section 54FSection 55A

…ilar view was taken by the Authority for Advance Rulings, New Delhi in the case of Dipankar Mohan Ghosh [supra]. Moreover, we find that the decision heavily relied upon by the first appellate authority has been reversed by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in 392 ITR 18. We find that the Hon'ble High Court has held "We are of the opinion that benefit of section 54F before its amendment can be extended to a residential house purchased outside India 11. Considering the facts of the case in totality, in light of the judicial decisions discussed hereinabove, we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of dedu…

ARABOLU VENKATA NAGA DEEPATHI REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, N. SATYARAMANUJAMM ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed

ITA 178/VIZ/2018[2010-2011]Status: HeardITAT Visakhapatnam28 Mar 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.178/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2010-11) Smt.Arabolu Venkata Naga Deepthi Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. By Power Of Attorney Holder (International Taxation) Smt. N.Satyaramanujam Visakhapatnam Flat No.403, Dhanna Apartments Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Atcpa6413A] (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri I.Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 195Section 201(1)Section 234ASection 54Section 54F

…-16 onwards as well as the CBDT's Circular dated 21-1-2015, it is evident that amendment incorporated in Section 54F(1) of the Act is prospective in nature. Similar view has been taken in Leena Jugalkishor Shah v. Asstt, CIT , [2016] 72 taxmann.com 185/[2017] 392 ITR 18 (Guj), Dipankar Mohan Ghosh, in re [2018 89 taxmann.com 218/401 ITR 129 (AAR - New Delhi) and CIT v. Anurag Pandit in I.T.A.No.1169/2018 dated 14-5-2019 (New Del). We concur with the view taken by Delhi, Gujarat and Madras High Courts. 12 ITA No.178/Viz/2018, A.Y.2010-11 Smt.Arabolu Venkata Naga Deepthi, Visakhapatnam In view of preceding analy…

ACIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. MANJIT SINGH BAIDWAN, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1245/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1245/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Acit, Sh. Manjit Singh Baidwan, बनाम (International Taxation), # 3151, Sector 27-D, Chandigarh Chandigarh

For Appellant: Sh. B.K. Nohria, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Dahiya, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 54

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “B”, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI R.L NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1245/CHD/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The ACIT, Sh. Manjit Singh Baidwan, बनाम (International Taxation), # 3151, Sector 27-D, Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAPPB3691P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing through video Conferencing राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Sandeep Dahiya, CIT "नधा"!रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. B.K. Nohria, CA सुनवाईक"तार%ख/Date of Hearing : 04.08.2021 उदघोषणाक"तार%ख/Date of Pronouncement…

COMMISSIONER OF vs. MR VINAY MISHRA

In the result, the appeal fails and the same is

ITA/75/2013HC Karnataka31 Aug 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(1)Section 260Section 260ASection 54Section 54(1)Section 54F

…t the amendment to Section 54F of the Act made by Finance Act, 2014 w.e.f. 01.04.2015 is prospective in nature and the aforesaid issue is no longer res integra and has been answered in favour of the assessee in cases of ‘LEENA JUGALKISHOR SHAH VS. ACIT’, 392 ITR 18 (GUJ), ‘DIPANKAR MOHAN GHOSH IN RE’, 401 ITR 129 (AAR-NEW DEL) AND ‘CIT VS. ANURAG PANDIT IN I.T.A.NO.1169/2018 DATED 14.05.2019 (NEW DEL). Reliance has also been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME 7 TAX VS. VATIKA TOWNSHIP P.LTD.’, (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC). 6. We have considered the subm…

ITO (IT)-2(2)(1),, MUMBAI vs. ANURADHA SHIVPRAKASH SETH, MUMBAI

In the result the first issue is decided in favour of

ITA 737/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (A.M.) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Ito(It)-4(2)(1), Vs Anuradha Shivprakash Seth 14/15, 2Nd Floor, Ashoka Shopping Mumbai Centre, Lokmanya Tilak Marg Next To G.T. Hospital, Mumbai-400 001 Pan : Bmxps2655D Appellant Respondednt

Section 4Section 45Section 48Section 5(2)Section 54

…se is purchased outside India. The Ld. DR for the revenue supported the order of AO. 6 ITA 737/Mum/2019 8. On the contrary, the Ld.AR submits that this issue is also covered in favour of assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Leena J Shah 392 ITR 18(Guj). 9. We have considered the submission of both the parties and gone through the orders of authorities below. We have noticed that the AO denied the exemption on the ground that the assessee has purchased residential house outside India. The Ld. CIT (A) granted relief to the assessee by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in…

M/S. HARVINDER SINGH,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 728/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14]

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 54Section 54F

…r view was taken by the Authority for Advance Rulings, New Delhi in the case of Dipankar Mohan Ghosh [supra]. Moreover, we find that the decision heavily relied upon by the first appellate authority has been reversed by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in 392 ITR 18. We find that the Hon'ble High Court has held “We are of the opinion that benefit of section 54F before its amendment can be extended to a residential house purchased outside India”. 11. Considering the facts of the case in totality, in light of the judicial decisions discussed hereinabove, we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -2 vs. ZTE CORPORATION

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/911/2019HC Delhi18 Oct 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 234BSection 9

…19 relates to the assessment year 2015-16 and ITA 911/2019 relates to the assessment year 2013-14. This Court has already considered the issues sought to be raised by the Appellant in Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation v. ZTE Corporation, 2017 392 ITR 18 (Delhi). Thereafter, we have also rejected the appeals preferred by the Revenue in ITA 763/2019, ITA 769/2019 and ITA 771/2019 vide order dated 26.08.2019. The following order came to be passed on that date: "ITA 763/2019. ITA 769/2019 & ITA 771/2019 3. At the outset, Mr. Ruchir Bhatia learned counsel for the Appellant very fairly states that the…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -2 vs. ZTE CORPORATION

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/817/2019HC Delhi18 Oct 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 234BSection 9

VAIJANTHI MAHAVIR OZA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(IT)-3(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 5799/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5799/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) बिाम/ Vaijanthi Mahavir Oza, Income Tax Officer- C/O. Chhajed & Doshi, (International Taxation)- 101, Hubtown Solaris, 3(3)(1) V. N.S Phadke Marg, Room No. 1628, Near East West Flyover, 16Th Floor Andheri (E), Air India Building Mumbai- 400069 Mumbai स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Abepo5631J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri. Piyush Chhajjed Revenue By: Miss. Deepika Arora (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 09.01.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 5799/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 23.06.2017, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-57, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2014-15, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 23.12.2016 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2014-15. I.T.A. No.5799/Mum/2017

For Appellant: Shri. Piyush ChhajjedFor Respondent: Miss. Deepika Arora (DR)

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

…sment year under consideration being AY 2014-15, the assessee cannot be denied benefit of deduction u/s. 54 of the Act. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Leena Jugalkishor Shah v. ACIT reported in (2017) 392 ITR 18 (Guj) , wherein Hon’ble Gujarat High Court decided the issue in favour of the tax-payer by holding that deduction u/s 54F shall be allowed for purchasing a residential property outside India. The assessee also relied upon the decision of Mumbai-tribunal in the case of Ashok Keshavlal Tejuja v. ACIT (2018) 91 taxmann.com 28 (Mum -Trib) , where one…

I.T.O. (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 4(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. SMT. TRUPTI DEEPAK SANGHANI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed”

ITA 1069/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 54

…on of Hon. ITAT, Ahmedabad in Leena J Shah vs ACIT, circle 1(1), Baroda [2006]6 SOT 721 (Ahd). 9. The latest judicial position on the matter is as under: a. The decision of Hon. ITAT in case of Leena J. Shah has been reversed by Gujarat High Court in [2017] 392 ITR 18 b. In ITO vs Mr. Nishant LalitJ adhav [ITA No. 6883/MUM/2014] dated 26.04.2017 Hon. ITAT, Mumbai has followed above decision. Both the above has ruled that prior to 01.04.2015, there is no explicit requirement that investment in new residential house is to be made in India. 10. Since the matter stands in favour of assessee as per latest judicia…

ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. KUNAL VATSAL LILANI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5042/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer (It) – 3(1)(1) V. Shri Kunal Vatsal Lilani Room No. 1627, Air India Building, 40/Ii, C-398, Off. Princess Street, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai – 400 002

For Appellant: Shri Saroj V. ManiarFor Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar

Section 54F

…f Ashok Keshavlal Tejuja v. A.C.I.T [91 taxmann.com 28]. Copy of the order is placed on record. Ld. Counsel for the assessee also submitted that similar issue has been decided by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Leena Jugalkishor Shah v. A.C.I.T [392 ITR 18] and following this judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court the Tribunal in the case of Ashok Keshavlal Tejuja v. A.C.I.T. (supra) has held that assessee is entitled for exemption u/s. 54F of the Act on the property purchased outside India. 4. Ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer in denying the exemption u/s. 54F of t…