CIT v. Ganga Properties

201 ITR 498High Court1993#10572 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT v. Ganga Properties

DIVYANIDHI BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 616/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jain (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 45(3)

…l to keep business running. The expenses meet criteria of allowability provided w/s 36 and various judicial pronouncement. Reliance is placed on following cases: i) C.I.T. vs. Kriti Resorts Pvt. Ltd. 243 ITR 529 (HPHC) ii) C.I.T. vs. Karanpura Collieries Ltd. 201 ITR 498 iii) C.I.T. vs. L VE. Vairavan Chettiar 72 ITR 114. iv) Arkaaye Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), (ITA No. 3552/Del/2011) DELHI BENCH "SMC": NEW DELHI In the case of Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. [1976] 102 ITR 25 (Guj.), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that the business commences with the first activity for acquiring…

M/S. SAFINA HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2512/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Nov 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojarim/S. Safina Hotels Pvt. Ltd., 84/85, Safina Plaza, Infantry Road, Bangalore-560 001 ….Appellant Pan Aaccs 5146G Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 6(1)(1), Bangalore. ……Respondent. Assessee By: Shri Tata Krishna, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jcit(D.R)

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, JCIT(D.R)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 37

…has come to an end. In this behalf reference may be made to the judgment of the Madras High Court in CIT v. Vellore Electric Corporation Ltd.[2000] 243 ITR 529 (Mad) and a judgment of the Calcutta High Court reported in CIT v. Karanpura Collieries Ltd. [1993] 201 ITR 498 (Cal). 13. Therefore, once the company is in existence the assessee can seek depreciation. Reliance placed by the Revenue on the first proviso of s. 32(2) is totally misplaced. Therefore, as far as question No. 1 is concerned the same is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 4.4.5. He also relied on the judgment in the case…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. RANJANA GARG, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the department and the Cross

ITA 2349/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. H. S. Sidhu, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Saxena, Pankaj GargFor Respondent: Sh. Sunilchand Sharma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 23(1)(a)

…preciated the facts and made the disallowance illegally. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: CO Nos. 250, 255 & 256/Del/2012 Ranjana & Amita Garg " CIT Vs Vellore Electric Corporation Ltd. 243 ITR 529 (Chen) " CIT Vs Karanpura Collieries Ltd. 201 ITR 498 (Cal) " CIT Vs Kriti Resorts (P) Ltd. (2011) 60 DTR 138 (HP) " Friends Clearing Agency (P) Ltd. Vs CIT (2011) 58 DTR 109 (Del) " CIT Vs Dhanrajgirji Raja Narsingirji (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC) " Matubai Chunilal Patel Vs CIT 66 ITR 408 (Guj) 19. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that apart from the other income…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. AMITA GARG, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the department and the Cross

ITA 2346/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. H. S. Sidhu, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Saxena, Pankaj GargFor Respondent: Sh. Sunilchand Sharma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 23(1)(a)

…preciated the facts and made the disallowance illegally. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: CO Nos. 250, 255 & 256/Del/2012 Ranjana & Amita Garg " CIT Vs Vellore Electric Corporation Ltd. 243 ITR 529 (Chen) " CIT Vs Karanpura Collieries Ltd. 201 ITR 498 (Cal) " CIT Vs Kriti Resorts (P) Ltd. (2011) 60 DTR 138 (HP) " Friends Clearing Agency (P) Ltd. Vs CIT (2011) 58 DTR 109 (Del) " CIT Vs Dhanrajgirji Raja Narsingirji (1973) 91 ITR 544 (SC) " Matubai Chunilal Patel Vs CIT 66 ITR 408 (Guj) 19. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that apart from the other income…

LMJ OVERSEAS LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 88/KOL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Smt. Arti Debnath, FCA & Shri Manish Bajoria, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kr. Nag, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

…allowable. Aggrieved, now assessee is in second appeal before us. 11. We find that the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties (1993)199 ITR 94 (Cal) and CIT Vs. Karanpura Collieries Ltd. (1993) 201 ITR 498 (Cal), wherein Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that just to maintain company some expenses are bound to be incurred by the assessee. We are in agreement with the findings of CIT(A) that expenditure claimed qua rental income should not have been allowed and rightly disallowed by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) but in term of both the decisions of Hon'…

LMJ OVERSEAS LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 87/KOL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Smt. Arti Debnath, FCA & Shri Manish Bajoria, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kr. Nag, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

…allowable. Aggrieved, now assessee is in second appeal before us. 11. We find that the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties (1993)199 ITR 94 (Cal) and CIT Vs. Karanpura Collieries Ltd. (1993) 201 ITR 498 (Cal), wherein Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that just to maintain company some expenses are bound to be incurred by the assessee. We are in agreement with the findings of CIT(A) that expenditure claimed qua rental income should not have been allowed and rightly disallowed by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) but in term of both the decisions of Hon'…

M/S LMJ BUSINESS CENTRE (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-8(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 541/KOL/2012[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2015AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Smt. Arti Debnath, FCA & Shri Manish Bajoria, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kr. Nag, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

…allowable. Aggrieved, now assessee is in second appeal before us. 11. We find that the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties (1993)199 ITR 94 (Cal) and CIT Vs. Karanpura Collieries Ltd. (1993) 201 ITR 498 (Cal), wherein Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that just to maintain company some expenses are bound to be incurred by the assessee. We are in agreement with the findings of CIT(A) that expenditure claimed qua rental income should not have been allowed and rightly disallowed by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) but in term of both the decisions of Hon'…

M/S LMJ BUSINESS CENTRE (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-8(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 540/KOL/2012[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2015AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Smt. Arti Debnath, FCA & Shri Manish Bajoria, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kr. Nag, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

…allowable. Aggrieved, now assessee is in second appeal before us. 11. We find that the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties (1993)199 ITR 94 (Cal) and CIT Vs. Karanpura Collieries Ltd. (1993) 201 ITR 498 (Cal), wherein Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that just to maintain company some expenses are bound to be incurred by the assessee. We are in agreement with the findings of CIT(A) that expenditure claimed qua rental income should not have been allowed and rightly disallowed by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) but in term of both the decisions of Hon'…

LMJ BUSINESS CENTRE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1700/KOL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Smt. Arti Debnath, FCA & Shri Manish Bajoria, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kr. Nag, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

…allowable. Aggrieved, now assessee is in second appeal before us. 11. We find that the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties (1993)199 ITR 94 (Cal) and CIT Vs. Karanpura Collieries Ltd. (1993) 201 ITR 498 (Cal), wherein Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that just to maintain company some expenses are bound to be incurred by the assessee. We are in agreement with the findings of CIT(A) that expenditure claimed qua rental income should not have been allowed and rightly disallowed by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) but in term of both the decisions of Hon'…

LMJ BUSINESS CENTRE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 8(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 1699/KOL/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Smt. Arti Debnath, FCA & Shri Manish Bajoria, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kr. Nag, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 263

…allowable. Aggrieved, now assessee is in second appeal before us. 11. We find that the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties (1993)199 ITR 94 (Cal) and CIT Vs. Karanpura Collieries Ltd. (1993) 201 ITR 498 (Cal), wherein Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that just to maintain company some expenses are bound to be incurred by the assessee. We are in agreement with the findings of CIT(A) that expenditure claimed qua rental income should not have been allowed and rightly disallowed by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) but in term of both the decisions of Hon'…