CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd.

377 ITR 635High Court2015#202 most cited

What is CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. authority for?

The second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia), introduced by the Finance Act, 2012, is curative and applies retrospectively from April 1, 2005. Consequently, if the recipient of a payment has filed their return and paid taxes on the amount from which tax was not deducted at source, the payer's expenditure cannot be disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia).

369

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. · Section 40(a)(ia) second proviso · retrospective application · curative amendment · disallowance for TDS default · recipient files return · tax paid · Finance Act 2012 · Delhi High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234B
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 211full value of considerationdomestic companysection 21section 48date of transfersection 40(a)(ia)put to usesection 50section 194csection 40(a)section 40

Judgments citing CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd.

Dy.C.I.T. 1 vs. Shri Sandeep Surendran Nair, Bhilai(Cg)

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 222/BIL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury,Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.222& 318/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11& 2011-12

For Appellant: ShriMakarand Joshi and ShriAniruddhaKavimandanFor Respondent: Smt. AnubhaTahGoel
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43B

…yees in their returns of income and has paid the taxes on such receipts. The aforesaid contention of the Revenue has not been controverted by Ld. AR. 22. We find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township P. Ltd. (2015) 377 ITR 635 (Del) has held that disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act is not justified when the payee has filed the return of income and offered the sum received to tax. The relevant observations of Hon’ble High Court reads as under:- “8. It is seen that the issue in these AYs arises in the context of the disallowance by the Assessing Officer of the payment…

S.K. Electronics, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 48(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 1511/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Patwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 271Section 40Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1511/DEL/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 S.K. Electronics, vs. ITO, Ward-48(4), Shop No.94, Old Lajpat Rai New Delhi. Market, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAPFS 2596G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Manoj Patwari, CA Respondent by: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing: 16 09 2019 Date of pronouncement: 08 11 2019 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 28.02.2017, passed by…

Kavya Travel Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward 4 (4), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for ay: 2013-14

ITA 1791/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms.R.Anitha, JCITFor Respondent: 17.09.2019
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…ent. The learned counsel for the assessee stated that no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the 1961 Act is warranted keeping in view ratio of decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township Private Limited reported in (2015) 377 ITR 635(Delhi). It was submitted that second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the 1961 Act which was inserted by Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 01.04.2013 shall come into play for rescue of the assessee, which was held to be retrospective by Hon’ble Delhi High Court w.e.f. 01.04.2005. It was submitted that in light of decision in the case of Hindustan Coca Col…

Kavya Travel Private Limited, Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward 4 (4), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for ay: 2013-14

ITA 1790/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms.R.Anitha, JCITFor Respondent: 17.09.2019
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…ent. The learned counsel for the assessee stated that no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the 1961 Act is warranted keeping in view ratio of decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township Private Limited reported in (2015) 377 ITR 635(Delhi). It was submitted that second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the 1961 Act which was inserted by Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 01.04.2013 shall come into play for rescue of the assessee, which was held to be retrospective by Hon’ble Delhi High Court w.e.f. 01.04.2005. It was submitted that in light of decision in the case of Hindustan Coca Col…

Mr. Satish Arora, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3516/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 40

…with first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act can be made. In so far as the 5 applicability of proviso brought by the Finance Act, 2012, he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township P. Ltd. (2015) 377 ITR 635 to contend that it has to be applied retrospectively. 7. On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly relied upon the order of the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that PNB Housing Finance Ltd. cannot be treated as a Nationalized Bank. It is just mere a subsidiary of Punjab National Bank and therefore, such a payment will not fall u/s. 194A(3)(iii). In so f…

ITO, Ward-3(2), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. R.K. Infra & Engineering (India) Pvt.Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue and the CO of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1227/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Nilanjan DeyFor Respondent: Shri Pawan Kumar
Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX A PPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1227/Hyd/2016 and CO No. 74/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Income-tax Officer, vs. R.K. Infra & Engg. (India) Ward – 3(2), Hyderabad. P. Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN – AADCR 9570Q Appellant Respondent/Cross Objector Assessee by: Shri Nilanjan Dey Revenue by: Shri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani Date of hearing: 19/08/2019 Date of pronouncement: 05/09/2019 O R D E R PER SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. This is an appeal of the assessee for the AY 2012-13 against the or…

A.Senthil Kumar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 776/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.776/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Arjunraj, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Hari Govind, JCIT
Section 153CSection 40

…sentative, there cannot be any disallowance when the recipient has included the receipt in their total income and paid taxes. The Ld. representative placed his reliance on the judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township (P.) Ltd. (2015) 377 ITR 635. 6. On the contrary, Shri K. Hari Govind, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is prospective in operation, therefore, it cannot be applicable during the year under consideration. Placing reliance on the judgment of Kerala High Court in Thomas George Muthoot v. CIT (2015) 63 ta…

The Jt. CIT, Range-4, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Mastek Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 514/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT- D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…h effect from a particular date specified by the legislature, the judicial forums, including this Tribunal, at times read it as being effect from a date much earlier than that too. One such case, for example, is CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd. [2015] 377 ITR 635/234 Taxman 825/61 taxmann.com 45 (Delhi), wherein Hon'ble Delhi High Court confirmed the action of the Tribunal in holding that the provision, though stated to be effective from 1st April 2013 must be held to be effective from 1st April 2005. Whether such an exercise can be done in the present case is, of course, something to be examined and our…

Mastek Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Jt.CIT, Rang4, Ahmedabad

ITA 172/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT- D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…h effect from a particular date specified by the legislature, the judicial forums, including this Tribunal, at times read it as being effect from a date much earlier than that too. One such case, for example, is CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd. [2015] 377 ITR 635/234 Taxman 825/61 taxmann.com 45 (Delhi), wherein Hon'ble Delhi High Court confirmed the action of the Tribunal in holding that the provision, though stated to be effective from 1st April 2013 must be held to be effective from 1st April 2005. Whether such an exercise can be done in the present case is, of course, something to be examined and our…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Mastek Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 1852/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT- D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…h effect from a particular date specified by the legislature, the judicial forums, including this Tribunal, at times read it as being effect from a date much earlier than that too. One such case, for example, is CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd. [2015] 377 ITR 635/234 Taxman 825/61 taxmann.com 45 (Delhi), wherein Hon'ble Delhi High Court confirmed the action of the Tribunal in holding that the provision, though stated to be effective from 1st April 2013 must be held to be effective from 1st April 2005. Whether such an exercise can be done in the present case is, of course, something to be examined and our…

Mastek Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, (OSD) - 1, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

ITA 1188/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Appeal(S) By Asset. Nos Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 1188/Ahd/2015 2009-10 M/S Mastek Ltd., D.C.I.T., (Osd)-1,Circle-4, 804/805Ahmedabad House, Opp. C.N. Vidyalaya, Nr. Ambawadi Circle, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad -380 006 Pan:Aaacm9908Q 2. 1852/Ahd/2015 2009-10 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad 3. It(Tp) 172/Ahd/2016 2010-11 M/S. Mastek Ltd. J.C.I.T., Ahmedabad Range-4, Ahmedabad 4. It(Tp) 514/Ahd/2016 2010-11 A.C.I.T., M/S. Mastek Ltd. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Assessee By : Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Krishna Murari, Cit- D.R.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar & Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Murari, CIT- D.R
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…h effect from a particular date specified by the legislature, the judicial forums, including this Tribunal, at times read it as being effect from a date much earlier than that too. One such case, for example, is CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd. [2015] 377 ITR 635/234 Taxman 825/61 taxmann.com 45 (Delhi), wherein Hon'ble Delhi High Court confirmed the action of the Tribunal in holding that the provision, though stated to be effective from 1st April 2013 must be held to be effective from 1st April 2005. Whether such an exercise can be done in the present case is, of course, something to be examined and our…

M/S. Birla Steel Corner, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 758/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 143(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40

…erefore no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act is called for in the hands of the assessee and for the aforesaid proposition he relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2015) 377 ITR 635, wherein it was held that second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is clarificatory in nature and is applicable retrospectively. He also placed on record additional evidence in the form of Certificate in Form 26AS, copy of ledger extract and certificate issued by the C.A. u/s 201(1) of the Act and interest certificates of various parties.…

Metal Extrusion India Ltd, Jaipur vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 163/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Raovk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No.163/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2015-16 Cuke M/S. Metal Extrusion India Ltd. The Addl. Cit Vs. 36A, Suraj Nagar East, Civil Lines Circle – 1 Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aafcm 3410 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, JCIT-DR
Section 143Section 50CSection 60C

…effective from the date on which the law, containing such an undue hardship or incongruity, was introduced. In support of this proposition, I find support from Hon'ble Delhi High Court's judgment in the case of CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd. [2015] 377 ITR 635/234 Taxman 825/61 taxmann.com 45, wherein approving the reasoning adopted an order authored by me during my tenure at Agra bench [i.e Rajeev Kumar Agarwal v. Addl. CIT [2014] 149 ITD 363/45 taxmann.com 555 (Agra - Trib.) which centred on the principle that when legislature is reasonable and 13 M/s. Metal Extrusion India Ltd. vs Addl. CIT , Circl…

Income Tax Officer vs. M/S. Shradda & Ihp Joint Venture [ Wangana Project], Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 200/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 200/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore (CIT)
Section 194CSection 40

…t has been duly offered for taxation. In this view of the matter, the assessee Joint Venture cannot be treated as assessee in default in view of the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P.) Ltd. reported in 377 ITR 635 (Del.) and the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Shri Chandrakant J. Mandale , ITA No.1708/PN/2012 for the assessment year 2008-09 decided on 10.04.2015, the assesee joint venture cannot be treated as assessee „in default‟. 9. Reverting to the arguments put forth by the Ld. DR regarding distinguishable aspe…

Vilas Transport Company Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO- 8(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 6655/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra, DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 201Section 210Section 4Section 40

…t has inserted by Finance Act, 2012 with effect from 01.04.2013 is retrospective. This decision of ITAT has considered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court and further, affirmed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Ansal Landmark Townships Pvt. Ltd [2015] 377 ITR 635 (Del). Hon’ble Delhi High Court Held as under: - “11. The first proviso to Section 210 (1) of the Act has been inserted to benefit the Assessee. It also states that where a person fails to deduct tax at source on the sum paid to a resident or on the sum credited to the account of a resident such person shall not be deemed to be an assessee in de…

Amul Research & Development Association, Anand vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Anand

ITA 3295/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jun 2019AY 2011-12
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 48Section 50C

…effective from the date on which the law, containing such an undue hardship or incongruity, was introduced. In support of this proposition, I find support from Hon'ble Delhi High Court's judgment in the case of CIT v. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd. [2015] 377 ITR 635/234 Taxman 825/61 Amul Research & Development Association Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2011-12 Page 6 of 10 taxmann.com 45, wherein approving the reasoning adopted an order authored by me during my tenure at Agra bench [i.e Rajeev Kumar Agarwal v. Addl. CIT [2014] 149 ITD 363/45 taxmann.com 555 (Agra - Trib.) which centred on the principle that wh…

Shri Bhaveshbhai O. Lakhani, Bhavnagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 1196/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Us. Bhaveshbhai O Lakhani Vs. Ito Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 2 Of 9

Section 143(3)Section 48Section 50CSection 50C(1)

…ITA No. 1196/Ahd/2017 Bhaveshbhai O Lakhani Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2012-13 Page 1 of 9 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar (Vice President), and Madhumita Roy (Judicial Member)] ITA No.: 1196/Ahd/2017 Assessment year: 2012-13 Bhaveshbhai O Lakhani ……..………………..Appellant Sumati Apartment, Shastri Nagar, Bhavnagar [PAN: ABJPL 8109 P] Vs Income Tax Officer ……………..…........Respondent Ward 1(3), Bhavnagar Appearances by Tushar P Hemani for the appellant SK Dev for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 25.04.2019 Date of pronouncement : 10.06.2019…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Nashik vs. M/S. Zeal Infra Projects Private Limited, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 159/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi

For Appellant: Shri P.S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 40

….4,69,57,184/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who after relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2015) 377 ITR 635 and other decisions cited in his order decided the issue in favour of the assessee by observing as under : “3.1 I have considered the materials placed before me. Brief facts are that the appellant while return of income u./s 139(1) on 30.09.2012 total income of Rs.41,680/- which was accepted by the AO in the order passed u/s 143(3) on 28.03.201…

Kishor Hira Bhandari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 30(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 370/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Ravish Soodshri Kishore Hira Bhandari I.T.O 30(2)(1) Kishore Bhandari Chawl, Mumbai Behind Mamta Medical Store, Vs. Marve Road, Malad (West), Mumbai – 400064

For Appellant: Shri Anil Thakrar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 54

…s effective from the date on which the law, containing such an undue hardship or incongruity, was introduced. In support of this proposition, I find support from Hon‟ble Delhi High Court‟s judgment in the case of CIT Vs Ansal Landmark Township Pvt Ltd [(2015) 377 ITR 635 (Del)], wherein approving the reasoning adopted an order authored by me during my tenure at Agra bench [i..e Rajeev Kumar Agarwal Vs ACIT (2014) 149 ITD 363 (Agra)] which centred on the principle that when legislature is reasonable and compassionate enough to undo the undue hardship caused by the statute "such an amendment in law, in view of the…

Oberoi Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069, Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1686/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2007-08

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194ISection 201(1)Section 40

…as we are dealing with assessment year 2007-08. We find no merit in Revenue’s instant argument as hon'ble Delhi high court in CIT vs. Ansal Landmark Township (P) ITA No1686/Kol/2017 A.Y.2007-08 Oberoi Holdings Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT, Ciri-6, Kol Page 3 Ltd (2015) 377 ITR 635 (Del) holds the above proviso to be curative in nature having retrospective effect. We therefore restore this first issue back to the Assessing Officer for necessary factual verification as per law after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the taxpayer who shall be entitled to raise all legal / factual arguments in consequential proceedi…