How many judgments cite CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd.?

46 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd. (199 ITR 94), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 13(4), Section 13(4A), Section 143(2), Section 143(3), Section 144C, Section 153.

CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd.

199 ITR 94High Court1993#2535 most cited

What is CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure incurred by a company for the purpose of its business, including expenses to fulfill statutory legal obligations or those related to an erstwhile business post-transfer, is allowable as revenue expenditure under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd. · 199 ITR 94 · Section 37 · business expenditure · revenue expenditure · allowability of expenses · statutory legal obligations · expenditure after business transfer · purpose of business · company expenses · erstwhile business expenses

Also reported as

62 Taxmann 285

Sections most often in play

Section 13(4)Section 13(4A)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C Section 153 Section 234D Section 24A

Issues it is cited on

salary section 37 transfer company section 14 section 143(3)total income person india business document interest

Judgments citing CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd.

FULLERTON FINANCIAL HOLDINGS PTE. LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(3)(1) - MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 1137/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153

…lding (Pte) Ltd (2021] 125 taxmann.com 2 (AAR-New Delhi) (refer to Page No. 111 of the legal PB) • R.B. BansilalAbirchandSpg&Wvg. Mills vis. CIT (1971) 81 ITR 34 (Bombay) (refer to Page Nos. 658 to 668 of the legal PB); • CIT v/s. Ganga Properties Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 94 (Cal) (refer to Page Nos. 669 to 671 of the legal PB); • Nakodar Bus Service (P.) Ltd. v/s. CIT (1989) 179 ITR 506 (P&H) (refer to Page Nos. 672 to 673 of the legal PB). • CIT v/s. Rampur Timber & Turnery Co. Ltd. (1981) 129 ITR 58 (All) (refer to Page Nos. 674 to 675 of the legal PB), • AtulBabubhai Shah v/s. JCIT [2020]116 taxmann.com 966 (Ahmed…

MR. SHANMUGAM RAVI,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ASSESSEMENT CIRCLE-2(1), BENGALURU

ITA 951/BANG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 143(3)Section 234A

…iness shall be deemed to be continuing and therefore, expenditure has to be allowed under section 37 of the Act. 3.4 In this regard, the ld. A.R. placed reliance on the following decisions in support of the contention canvassed: CIT vs. Ganga Properties Ltd., 199 ITR 94 (Cal.) Nakodar Bus Service (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT, 179 ITR 506 (P&H) 3.5 In view of the above, he submitted that even though the business was transferred, there were various litigations pertaining to income tax and labour laws which remained unresolved. In order to handle these issues, the assessee had to maintain staff and consultants. Therefore, busi…

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…

GIRI BUILDWELL PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 10(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 2676/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharmaita No. 2676/Del/2018, A.Y.2014-15 Giri Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, R-23 Lg-1 & 3 Nehru Enclave Circle-10(1), New Delhi- 110019 New Delhi Pan : Aabcg2921Q Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 24

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2676/Del/2018, A.Y.2014-15 Giri Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, R-23 LG-1 and 3 Nehru Enclave Circle-10(1), New Delhi- 110019 New Delhi PAN : AABCG2921Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue by Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 17.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 21.08.2023 ORDER Per Anubhav Sharma, JM : The appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 09.03.2018 of CIT(A)-3…

ANNAPURNA POLYMERS PVT. LTD. (IN VOL. LIQUIDATION),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2606/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar & Parin Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 250(6)

…s incurred to protect the source of earning of business income. 5. Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance relying on judgment totally on different facts. Ld. CIT (A) ought to have allowed expenditure appreciating judgment submitted [199 ITR 94 (Cal)] directly on the point that expenses incurred to preserve the asset until the name of the establishment is truck off the register or it is disallowed.” 3 I.T.A No. 2606/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2012-2013 Page No Annapurna Polymers Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT 3. Drawing our attention to the facts of the case, it was pointed out that both these expenses had bee…

MR.M J ARAVIND ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(3)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 222/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 48Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year: 2011-12 Shri M J Aravind, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Nirvana, 329, 18th Cross, of Income Tax, Ideal Homes Layout, Phase I, Circle 2(3)(1), Rajarajeshwari Nagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 098. PAN: ACBPA 0889J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 23.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 25.02.2022 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Acco…

SHREE BALAJI UMBER PROPERTIES P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-13(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1497/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Ravish Sood, Hon'Bleshree Balaji Umber Properties Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – 13(2)(2) Unit No. 201, A Wing Mumbai - 400020 Fulcrum Sahar Road Next To Hyaat Regency, Andheri (E) Mumbai -400099 Pan: Aaacu9207C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi Ms. Akshita Bhandari Department By : Shri B.K. Bagchi

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…d the relevant expenditure is 9 Shree Balaji Umber Properties Pvt. Ltd., to be allowed as revenue expenditure. With regard to other regular expenditures he relied on the written submissions and the decision in the case of CIT v. Ganga properties Ltd., [(1993) 199 ITR 94 (Cal)], Nakodar Bus Service (P.) Ltd., v. CIT [(1989) 179 ITR 506 (P&H)] and ITO v. Mokul Finance P. Ltd., [(2008) 110 TTJ 445 (Del.)] where the revenue expenditure incurred by the assessee should be allowed as long as it is incurred for the purpose of business. 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that the where funds were utilized by the asse…

M/S GODREJ INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. (NOW AMALGAMATED WITH GODREJ & BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

Accordingly, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3163/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Godrej Investments Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – Circle – 14(1)(2) M/S. Kalyaniwall & Mistry Llp Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Esplande House, 2Nd Floor Mumbai - 400020 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg Fort, Mumbai – 400001 Pan: Aaacg1395D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Farrokh Irani Department By : Shri Ambuselvam

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh IraniFor Respondent: Shri Ambuselvam

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…Company, inter alia, relies on the following decisions of various High Courts, wherein it has been held that expenditure incurred by a Company to fulfill its statutory legal obligations is allowable in any view of the matter: (a) CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd. (199 ITR 94, Cal.) (b) CIT v. New Savan Sugar and Gur Refining Co. Ltd. (185 ITR 564, Cal) (c) CIT v. Rampur Timber and Turnery Co. Ltd. (129 ITR 58, All.) (d) Kulgam Holdings Pvt Ltd vs ACIT, CC - 1(1) & others. Without prejudice to the contentions of the Appellant Company that such expenses are allowable u/s. 57 of the Act, it is respectfully submitted tha…

MR. M J ARAVIN,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1510/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 14ASection 48Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2013-14 Mr. M J Aravind, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Nirvana, 329, 18th Cross, of Income Tax, Ideal Homes Layout, Phase I, Circle 2(3)(1), Rajarajeshwari Nagar, Bengaluru. Bangalore – 560 098. PAN: ACBPA 0889J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 06.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 06.09.2021 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accou…

SHAILRAJ HOTELS PRIVATE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-8(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 152/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: PendingITAT Kolkata24 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Judicial Member) I.T.A. No. 152/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shailraj Hotels Private Limited.......………………..…......................................................Appellant [PAN: AAECS 3921 K] Vs. DCIT, Circle-8(2), Kolkata............................................................................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. Miraj D. Shah, A/R, appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Sh. Supriyo Paul, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of conclu…

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…

SMT. ZEELIA ZEENA MAYZEAN SHENOY,MANGALURU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1716/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Smt.Sheethal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…ty, i.e., company, such as salaries, PF, ESI and other inevitable expenses. In that case, the assessee was a company and the Tribunal has followed the judgment of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Ganga Properties Ltd. as reported in 199 ITR 94 in which it was held that expenditure incurred in complying with statutory obligations is deductible u/s. 57(iii) of IT Act. As per the relevant para of judgment reproduced by the Tribunal, it was noted that even if a company derives income from ‘other sources’, it has to maintain its establishment for complying with statutory 8 IT(IT)A Nos.1715…

SMT. ZEELIA ZEENA MAYZEAN SHENOY,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), MANGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1715/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Smt.Sheethal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 143(3)Section 234B

M/S. GL LITMUS EVENTS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2682/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavam/S.Gl Litmus Events Pvt. Vs. Acit Ltd. Central Circle-17, B-90, Second Floor, Room No. 356, Vishwakarma Colony Ara Centre, New Delhi – 110 044 Jhandewalan Extension Pan Aadcg6909N New Delhi – 110 055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Raghunath, Sr. DR

Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s.GL Litmus Events Pvt. Vs. ACIT Ltd. Central Circle-17, B-90, Second Floor, Room No. 356, Vishwakarma Colony ARA Centre, New Delhi – 110 044 Jhandewalan Extension PAN AADCG6909N New Delhi – 110 055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Assessee by: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Department by : Shri Raghunath, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23/10/2019 Date of 17/01/2020 pronouncement O R D E R PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JM: This appeal is filed by the assessee again…

M/S. IDEAL HITECH ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3316/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 22Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)Section 24Section 251(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .No.-3316/Del/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2012-13) M/s Ideal Hitech Engineering Equipment vs ITO (P) Ltd. Ward 12(1) 17, Okhla Industrial Estate-III, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAACI0319R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Shri Ved Jain, Adv. Shri Nischay Kantoor, CA Respondent by Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR ORDER PER SH. H.S. SIDHU, J.M. This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals)-18, New Delhi dated 06.04.2017 for AY 2012-…

ASCENT FINECHEM PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 440/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent (S) Appellant Respondent 1-2 438-439/Ahd/2018 2008-09 Ascent Finechem Pvt. A.C.I.T, Circle- & Ltd., 1(1)(2), 2009-10 11, Ground Floor, Ahmedabad. Suryarath, B/H. Whilte House, Panchawati, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan No.Aabca6349Q

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Dr. D.R

Section 10B

…to conclude that there was no business activity does not hold good in the given facts and circumstances. 6.2 In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ganga Properties Ltd. reported in 199 ITR 94 (Cal) wherein it was held as under:- “A limited company even if it does not carry on business, even if it derives income from other sources, has to maintain its establishment for complying with statutory obligation so long as it is in operation and its name is not struck off the register or unless the company is dissolved. So long as the company i…

ASCENT FINECHEM PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 439/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Dr. D.R

Section 10B

ASCENT FINECHEM PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 438/AHD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Dr. D.R

Section 10B

GRANDEUR PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4462/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri

Section 143(3)Section 24Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…necessary for complying with the obligations of the assessee and to maintain its corporate status. In this respect, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ganga Properties Ltd. [1993] 199 ITR 94 (Calcutta), wherein Hon’ble Calcutta High court has stated that even if the assessee does not carry on business but it derives its income from other sources it has to maintain its establishment for complying with statutory obligations was allowable its own operation and it has to maintain its corporate status. Hon’ble Calcutta High Court observed…

BIP DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1214/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 143(3)

…I.T.A. Nos 1214, 1215, 1216/KOL/2017 Assessment years 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2009-10 & I.T.A. Nos. 1357, 1358 & 1359/KOL/2017 Assessment years 2006-07, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Page 1 of 11 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member I.T.A. Nos. 1214, 1215 & 1216/KOL/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-2007, 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 BIP Developers Pvt. Limited,.........................................................Appellant Ground Floor, Building Bata, Bengal Intelligente Park, Block EP & GP, Sector-V, Salt Lake Electro…

Showing 1–20 of 46 · Page 1 of 3