CIT & anr. v. P.R. Seshadri

181 ITR 101High Court#23347 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT & anr. v. P.R. Seshadri

MOHAMMAD AKHTAR KHAN,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), BHILAI

ITA 87/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur13 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Ravish Sood & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩलसं. / Ita No. 87/Rpr/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Mohammad Akhtar Khan Ibrahim Bada, Nr Masjid Titurdih, Raipur, (C.G.) . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1), Bhilai (C.G.) . . . . . . .प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri R. B. Doshi Revenue By : Shri Gitesh Kumar सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 16/11/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 16/11/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Assessee By The Present Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Raipur [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 26/04/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”] Confirming The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1) Raipur [For Short “Ao”] For The Assessment Year 2013-14 [For Short “Ay”] 2. The Grounds Raised In The Appeal Memo Are;

For Appellant: Shri R. B. DoshiFor Respondent: Shri Gitesh Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 54Section 54F

…that a mere extension of the existing building will not give benefit to the assessee under Section 54F of the Act. The case of the assessee clearly comes within the ken of the ratio of the aforesaid decision. The decision in the case of CIT v. P.V. Narasimhan 181 ITR 101 (Mad), as relied by the ld. Counsel was considered in the case of Pradeep Kumar (supra). In view of the decision of the Jurisdictional ITAT-Raipur Page 6 of 8 Mohammad Akhtar Khan ITA No 87/RPR/2019 AY 2013-14 High Court which is of binding nature, I agree with the view taken by the learned Judicial Member. 8. Respectfully following the same,…

ANIL ANEJA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1477/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 154Section 2Section 54

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1477/DEL/2016 (A.Y. 2011-12) Anil Aneja Vs. ACIT A-1/178, Circle-61(1) Safdarjung Enclave New Delhi New Delhi- PAN : AAGPA2328B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Ranjan Chopra, CA Respondent by Smt. Rinku Singh, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 01.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement 06.08.2019 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed against the order dated 10.08.2015 by the assessee passed by CIT(A)-20, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2011-…

GANESH CHAWLA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

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

ITA 452/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jan 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.” Sh. Genesh Chawla Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Podar (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Roshanta Meena
Section 54F

…he once the assessee established that a new house was constructed then the deduction u/s 54F is allowable. In support of his contention he has relied upon the following decision as under:- • CIT & anr. Vs. P.R. Seshadri 329 ITR 377 • CIT vs. P.V. Narasimhan 181 ITR 101 • CIT vs. V. Natarajan 287 ITR 271 • CIT vs. Kamal Wahal 351 ITR 0004 • Shri Laxmi Narayan vs. CIT in ITA No. 20/2016 Thus, the ld. AR has submitted that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Kamal Wahal (supra) has held that there is nothing in section 6 Sh. Genesh Chawla vs. ACIT 54F to show that the assessee should have purchased/c…

CIT & anr. v. P.R. Seshadri (181 ITR 101) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax