Binny Ltd. v. ACWT

324 ITR 34High Court2010#20501 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Judgments citing Binny Ltd. v. ACWT

Ace Cabs Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2), Delhi, C R Building

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 443/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanace Cabs Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 1 (2), 562, Silver Oak Lane, Delhi. M.G. Road, Ghitorni, Delhi – 110 030. (Pan : Aaica4494R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate Ms. Bharti Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date Of Order : 04.10.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short]/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 12.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Submitted An Application Under Rule 29 Of The Itat Rules For Admitting The Additional Evidences & The Contents Thereof Are Reproduced Below:-

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…dditional evidences placed under Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 stands admitted.” 11 To the same effect are the following judgements: a) Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah v. CIT [1998] 100 Taxman 404 (Bom.) b) Binny Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 324 ITR 34 (Madras) c) Asst. CIT v. Citizen Urban Co-op. Bank Ltd. [2009] 120 ITD 513 (Amritsar) d) ONS Creations Private Limited Vs ITO ITA No. 6250/De1/2013 (ITATDelhi) 12 In view of the aforementioned reasons and the case laws cited in the present application, it is prayed that the additional evidences may kindly be admitted in the interest of justice. 1…

Asst CIT 17(3), Mumbai vs. Siroya Holding, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1643/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru
Section 22

…rd. On these facts, CIT (A) analyzed and applied the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of CIT vs. Zaibunisa Begam [1985] 151 ITR 320 (AP) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Binny Ltd vs. ACWT [2010] 324 ITR 34 (Mad), which are relevant for explaining the meaning of the expression “land appurtenant thereto”. In addition, he relied on certain other decisions of the Tribunal also. CIT (A) also analyzed the provisions of section 22 of the Act which read as under: - “22. The annual value of property consisting of any buildings or lands appurtenant thereto o…

Asst CIT 17(3), Mumbai vs. Siroya Holding, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1642/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru
Section 22

…rd. On these facts, CIT (A) analyzed and applied the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of CIT vs. Zaibunisa Begam [1985] 151 ITR 320 (AP) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Binny Ltd vs. ACWT [2010] 324 ITR 34 (Mad), which are relevant for explaining the meaning of the expression “land appurtenant thereto”. In addition, he relied on certain other decisions of the Tribunal also. CIT (A) also analyzed the provisions of section 22 of the Act which read as under: - “22. The annual value of property consisting of any buildings or lands appurtenant thereto o…

ACIT Circle -12(3), Mumbai vs. Siroya Holdings, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6563/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri D. Karunakara Rao

For Appellant: Shri Akhilendra Yadav, DRFor Respondent: Shri B.V. Jhaveri
Section 22

…d. On these facts, CIT (A) analyzed and applied the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of CIT vs. Zaibunisa Begam [ 1985] 151 ITR 320 (AP) and the judgment of the Hon‟ble Madras High Court in the case of Binny Ltd vs. ACWT [2010] 324 ITR 34 (Mad), which are relevant for explaining the meaning of the expression “land appurtenant thereto”. In addition, he relied on certain other decisions of the Tribunal also. CIT (A) also analyzed the provisions of section 22 of the Act which read as under:- “22. The annual value of property consisting of any buildings or lands appurtenant thereto of…

Binny Ltd. v. ACWT (324 ITR 34) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax