CIT v. G.R. Developers

353 ITR 1High Court2013#11914 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also reported as

22 Taxmann.com 265

Judgments citing CIT v. G.R. Developers

DCIT, Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S. Joy Syndicate & Enclave Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

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

ITA 102/JPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani ( C.A.)For Respondent: Ms Runi Pal (Addl. CIT)a fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 14ASection 801Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 102/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 cuke The DCIT, M/s Joy Syndicate & Enclave Pvt. Ltd. Circle-3, Vs. G-10-11, Royal World, S.C. Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACE5910E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms Runi Pal (Addl. CIT)a fu/kZkfjrh dh vks…

M/S Agarwal Construction Company, Bhopal vs. Dypti Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central), Bhopal

ITA 596/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Mis Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing It(Ss)A Nos.233 To 238/Ind/2017 Assessment Year:2006-07 To 2011-12 M/S. Agrawal Construction Co. Acit, 1(1) बनाम/ Bhopal Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Aaefa8225H It(Ss)A No.224 To 226/Ind/2017 Assessment Year:2009-10 To 2011-12 Acit, 1(1) M/S. Agrawal Construction बनाम/ Bhopal Co. Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaefa8225H Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 3Section 801Section 80I

…uction be denied to the assessee whose plans were sanctioned according to the prevalent rules. The assessee was entitled to deduction under section 80IB(10)” Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Karnatake High Court in the case of CIT vs. GR Developers; 353 ITR 1 wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held as under :- “ The definition of built up area, as inserted in sub-section (14)(a) of section 80IB by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 2004, which came into effect from April 1, 2005, cannot be held to be retrospective. It applies only to such housing projects, which are approved subsequent to April 1, 2005. The hou…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-II, Bhopal vs. M/S Agrawal Construction Co., Bhopal

ITA 590/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Mis Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing It(Ss)A Nos.233 To 238/Ind/2017 Assessment Year:2006-07 To 2011-12 M/S. Agrawal Construction Co. Acit, 1(1) बनाम/ Bhopal Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.Aaefa8225H It(Ss)A No.224 To 226/Ind/2017 Assessment Year:2009-10 To 2011-12 Acit, 1(1) M/S. Agrawal Construction बनाम/ Bhopal Co. Bhopal Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aaefa8225H Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 3Section 801Section 80I

…uction be denied to the assessee whose plans were sanctioned according to the prevalent rules. The assessee was entitled to deduction under section 80IB(10)” Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Karnatake High Court in the case of CIT vs. GR Developers; 353 ITR 1 wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held as under :- “ The definition of built up area, as inserted in sub-section (14)(a) of section 80IB by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 2004, which came into effect from April 1, 2005, cannot be held to be retrospective. It applies only to such housing projects, which are approved subsequent to April 1, 2005. The hou…

M/S. Hinduja Land Development Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. ACIT-Circle-11(4), Bangalore

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1784/BANG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri S V Ravi Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT (DR)
Section 80I

…s relied upon the decision dated: 17.11.2015 of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Rajeshwari Cotton Ginning and Pressing Industries Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 801/2009 & ITA Nos. 840- 841/2009 as well as in the case of CIT Vs G.R. Developers 353 ITR 1 (Karn). The ld. AR has further pointed out that for the assessment year 2007-08 the AO has accepted the claim of deduction u/s. 80IB(10). Alternatively, the ld. AR has contented that even in case some units are found to be exceeding the area of 1,500 sq.ft. only on the proportionate disallowance of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) has to be considered. 3…

Shri Ramsingh Kumar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, this ground of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2196/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jan 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2194, 2195 & 2196/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Ramsingh Kumar, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.7, 1St Floor, V. Income Tax, Papanasam Sivan Salai, Non-Corporate Circle – 2, Santhome, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 004. Pan : Afdpr4037A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.10.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.01.2017

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजारी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी जी. पवन कुमार, "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 2194, 2195 & 2196/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Ramsingh Kumar, The Deputy Commissioner of No.7, 1st Floor, v. Income Tax, Papanasam Sivan Salai, Non-Corporate Circle – 2, Santhome, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 004. PAN : AFDPR4037A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर…

Shri Ramsingh Kumar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, this ground of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2195/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2194, 2195 & 2196/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Ramsingh Kumar, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.7, 1St Floor, V. Income Tax, Papanasam Sivan Salai, Non-Corporate Circle – 2, Santhome, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 004. Pan : Afdpr4037A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.10.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.01.2017

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजारी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी जी. पवन कुमार, "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 2194, 2195 & 2196/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Ramsingh Kumar, The Deputy Commissioner of No.7, 1st Floor, v. Income Tax, Papanasam Sivan Salai, Non-Corporate Circle – 2, Santhome, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 004. PAN : AFDPR4037A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर…

Shri Ramsingh Kumar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, this ground of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2194/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2194, 2195 & 2196/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Ramsingh Kumar, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.7, 1St Floor, V. Income Tax, Papanasam Sivan Salai, Non-Corporate Circle – 2, Santhome, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 004. Pan : Afdpr4037A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.10.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.01.2017

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजारी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी जी. पवन कुमार, "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 2194, 2195 & 2196/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Ramsingh Kumar, The Deputy Commissioner of No.7, 1st Floor, v. Income Tax, Papanasam Sivan Salai, Non-Corporate Circle – 2, Santhome, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 004. PAN : AFDPR4037A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर…

ITO 16(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Prestige Builders, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4596/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Ms. Bharti SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Neelam C. Jadhav
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA No. 4596 & 4597/MUM/2014 Assessment Year: 2008-09 & 2009-10 ITO 16(2)(4) Vs. Prestige Builders 2nd Floor, Matru Mandir 1st Floor, 297 Tardeo Rd. Old Tardeo Rd. Mumbai- 400007 Nana Chowk, Mumbai- 400007 PAN No. AAKFM1063B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Bharti Singh Respondent By : Ms. Neelam C. Jadhav Date of Hearing : 28/07/2016 Date of pronouncement : 10/08/2016 O R D ER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM : These two appeals by the Revenue are aris…

ITO 16(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Prestige Builders, Mumbai

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 3355/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ashwani Taneja: Ito-16(2)(4) Vs M/S. Prestige Builders 1St Floor, 297, Old Tardeo Road, (Appellant) Nana Chowk, Mumbai 400 007. Pan : Aakfm1063B (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Kirtney (DR)For Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : ITO-16(2)(4) Vs M/s. Prestige Builders 1st floor, 297, Old Tardeo Road, (Appellant) Nana Chowk, Mumbai 400 007. PAN : AAKFM1063B (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S.R. Kirtney (DR) Respondent by : None Date of Hearing : 10/02/2016 Date of Pronouncement : 24/02/2016 O R D E R PER ASHWANI TANEJA, AM : This appeal is against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, Mumbai (in short referred to as „CIT(A)‟) against the order passed by the Assessing Office…

CIT v. G.R. Developers (353 ITR 1) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax