CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya

91 Taxmann.com 20Supreme Court of India2018#442 most cited

What is CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya authority for?

Interest on enhanced compensation received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the compensation, not merely interest income, and is exigible to tax on a receipt basis.

205

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya · Govindbhai Mamaiya SC · interest on enhanced compensation · Section 28 Land Acquisition Act · taxability receipt basis · part of compensation · Section 10(37) · Section 56(2)(viii) · Section 57(iv) · Section 145A · Section 45(5) · Ghanshyam Dass HUF

Also reported as

367 ITR 498229 Taxmann 13816 SCC 449

Sections most often in play

Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57(iv)Section 10(37)Section 263Section 143(3)Section 45(5)Section 145ASection 28

Issues it is cited on

section 56(viii)section 2(viii)section 45(5)(c)section 155(16)section 145b(1)section 145bsection 23(1a)section 145a(b)section 45(5)section 45(5)(b)section 57(iv)section 56(2)(viii)

Judgments citing CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya

Krishan Pal Singh HUF, Jaipur vs. Assessing Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1268/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: the Ld CIT (Appeals).

For Appellant: Shri N. K. Agarwal, CA &For Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1268/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 cuke Krishan Pal Singh HUF ITO, Vs. Krishan Pal Singh 124 Dhaka Ward 1(4), Nagar Opp, Platinum Upasana Jaipur Rosewood Sirsi Road, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAMHK2914H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri N. K. Agarwal…

Shastri Lal, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3918/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Chaudhary, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No. 3918/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Shastri Lal Vs Income Tax Officer, C/o. CA R.S. Poonia, D-82-B, Ward-4(1), Siwad Area, Krishna Marg, Gurgaon Bapu Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302015 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEJPL 5341 J Assessee by : Sh. Rajat Chaudhary, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 02.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 02.01.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/2…

Dilbag Singh, Rohtak vs. Income Tax Officer, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3909/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No. 3909/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Dilbag Singh Vs Income Tax Officer, 951, Sector – 3, Rohtak Rohtak, Haryana – 124 001 Haryana (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. BVTPS6257E Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 02.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 02.01.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066992732(1) dated 24.07.2024, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the…

Mulkh Raj Mehta and Sons HUF, Hisar vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2406/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 2406/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Mulkh Raj Mehta & Sons Huf, Vs Pr. Cit, 374, Sector-15A, Hisar, Rohtak, Haryana-125001 Haryana-124001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaihm9927L Assessee By : Sh. Mahfuzur Rahman, Ca & Sh. Surajh Bhan Nain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19, Arises Against The Order Of Pcit, Rohtak Dated 18.03.2024 In Din & Order No. Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023-24/1062878615(1), In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Mahfuzur Rahman, CA &For Respondent: Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 145B(1)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No. 2406/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Mulkh Raj Mehta & Sons HUF, Vs Pr. CIT, 374, Sector-15A, Hisar, Rohtak, Haryana-125001 Haryana-124001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAIHM9927L Assessee by : Sh. Mahfuzur Rahman, CA & Sh. Surajh Bhan Nain, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. B. S. Anand, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 25.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 10.12.2024 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises…

Jagjit Singh Kataria, Sonepat vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1245/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US (Judicial Member)

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

…1 Jagjit Singh Kataria Vs. Pr. CIT THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORESHRI S RIFAUR RAHMN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Jagjit Singh Kataria, Vs. Principal CIT, H. No. 2333, HBC Sector-15, Rohtak Sonepat, Haryana, 131001 PAN :AQFPK6338L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Suresh K. Gupta, CA Department by Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu,CIT( DR) Date of hearing 22.10.2024 Date of pronouncement 10.12.2024 ORDER PERYOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER: The Assessee preferred the captioned appeal by challenging the orde…

Nishant Choudhary, Fatehabad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Fatehabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2863/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganeshita No. 2863/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Nishant Choudhary, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O Sh. Vijay Choudhary, Choudhary Ward-1, Niwas, G.T. Road (Opp. Ratia Fatehabad, Crossing), Fatehabad, Haryana-125050 Haryana-125050 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aempc0965Q Assessee By : Sh. Raj Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.12.2024 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2015-16, Arises Against The Order Of Cit(A)-5, Ludhiana Dated 13.02.2019 In Case No. 255/Rot/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2018-19, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145B(1)Section 263Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No. 2863/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Nishant Choudhary, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/o Sh. Vijay Choudhary, Choudhary Ward-1, Niwas, G.T. Road (Opp. Ratia Fatehabad, Crossing), Fatehabad, Haryana-125050 Haryana-125050 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEMPC0965Q Assessee by : Sh. Raj Kumar, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 03.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 05.12.2024 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This ass…

Vachaspati Sharma, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -4(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1180/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Vachaspati Sharma Vs Ito Village – Hayatpur Garhi Ward-4 Harsaru, Hayatpur, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan No.Fnqps2021R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate Sh. K.L. Pahwa, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 11/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 Order Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

Section 10Section 10(37)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 18Section 234BSection 234DSection 28Section 45(5)Section 56

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Vachaspati Sharma Vs ITO Village – Hayatpur Garhi Ward-4 Harsaru, Hayatpur, Gurgaon Gurgaon PAN No.FNQPS2021R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellants by Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate Sh. K.L. Pahwa, Advocate Respondent by Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR Date of hearing: 11/09/2024 Date of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 ORDER SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JM : The above captioned appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC/Commissioner of Inco…

Jai Singh Karwal, Hansi vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1963/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 203Section 263Section 28

…1 Jai Singh Karwal, Vs. PCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1963/Del/2024, A.Y.2013-14) Jai Singh Karwal Principal Commissioner of House No. 3, Model Town, Income Tax, Aayakar Hansi, Vs. Bhawan, Opp, Mansarover Haryana park, Rohtak, PAN : ABCPK4153H Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Kuldip Khere, CA Respondent by Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 17/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement /11/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM : This appeal is…

Hardev Raj, Sirsa vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Sirsa

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

ITA 197/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Lalit Mohan, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 156Section 249(4)(b)

…(37) of the Act. 3.1 That while sustaining the aforesaid addition the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred both in law and on fact in not following the binding judgments of Apex Court: i) 315 B) ITR 1 (SC) CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) ii) 367 ITR 498(SC) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya iii) 400 ITR 23 (SC) PCIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) iv) 302 CTR 458 (SC) UOI vs. Hari Singh and Ors. v) C.A. No. 18475/2017 dated 10.11.2017 ITO vs. Muktanandgiri Maheshgiri 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred both in law and on fact in sustaining the view taken by learned Assessing O…

Bhim Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 255/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Arora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(37)Section 28Section 34Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57Section 69ASection 80CSection 80D

…hich is not the case with interest u/s 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 9. It was submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated the principle pronounced in the case of Ghanshyam [supra] in the following cases: i) CIT Vs. Govind Bhai Mamaiya (2014)367 ITR 498 (SC) ii) CIT Vs. Chet Ram (2018) 400 ITR 23(SC) 10. The ld. counsel for the assessee further relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Joginder Singh 217 Taxmann 208 and Gujarat High Court in the case of Movaliya Bhikha Bhai Bala 70 Taxmann.com 45 wherein their Lordships have decided that inter…

Veena Shah, Panipat vs. Pr CIT, Rohtak

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1222/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 10(37)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORESHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1222/Del/2023, A.Y. 2018-19 Veena Shah Pr. CIT, 198, Model Town, Rohtak Panipat, Haryana Vs. PAN: BJKPS3041P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Satyam Aneja, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Dharm Veer Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 22/04/2024 Date of Pronouncement 28/06/2024 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM The instant appeal of the Assessment Year [In short, the ‘AY’] 2018-19filed by the assessee is against the order, dated 27.03.2023, under s…

Om Prakash, Fatehabad vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1674/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Delhi19 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh.Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Om Prakash Vs. Principal Cit 45 Matana Majra, Rohtak Fatehabad, Haryana Haryana Pan: Cmspp7173D Appellant Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 263

…1 Om Prakash, Fatehabad Vs. Pr. CIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH.SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER Om Prakash Vs. Principal CIT 45 Matana Majra, Rohtak Fatehabad, Haryana Haryana PAN: CMSPP7173D Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Lalit Mohan, CA Revenue by Sh. Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT DR Date of Hearing 08/04/2024 Date of Pronouncement 19/04/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Rohtak [“Ld. PCIT”, for…

Jai Parkash, Fatehabad vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1675/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usa.Yr. : 2018-19 Jai Parkash, Vs. Principal Commissoiner Of Bhattu Road, Income Tax, Rohtak Near Anaj Mandi, Fatehabad – 125050 Haryana (Pan: Amypk5328D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(viii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.YR. : 2018-19 JAI PARKASH, VS. PRINCIPAL COMMISSOINER OF BHATTU ROAD, INCOME TAX, ROHTAK NEAR ANAJ MANDI, FATEHABAD – 125050 HARYANA (PAN: AMYPK5328D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by : Shri Lalit Mohan, CA Respondent by : Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 08.04.2024 Date of pronouncement : 15.04.2024 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM : The Assessee has filed the Appeal against the Order of the Ld. Pr. CIT, Rohtak dated 27.3.2023 passed u/s. 2…

Gulshan Kumar, Fatehabad vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1676/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 203Section 263Section 56(2)(viii)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Gulshan Kumar, Vs. Pr. CIT M/s. Gulshan Variety Store, Rohtak. Thana Road, Fatehabad, Haryana 125050. PAN AIUPK6598B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Lalit Mohan, CA Department by : Shri T. James Singson, CIT, DR Date of Hearing 28/11/2023 Date of 13/02/2024 pronouncement O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 21.03.2023 of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak (“PCIT”…

Purnimasareen, Panipat vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 892/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19 Smt. Purnima Sareen Vs. Pr. Cit, 744-745, Model Town, Rohtak Panipat, Haryana-132103 Pan Bokps2116C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(viii)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Smt. Purnima Sareen Vs. Pr. CIT, 744-745, Model Town, Rohtak Panipat, Haryana-132103 PAN BOKPS2116C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Department by: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 21.11.2023 Date of 29.01.2024 pronouncement: O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 21.03.2023 of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…

Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Gurgaon vs. PCIT, Faridabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 357/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 263Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.357/Del/2023, A.Y.2018-19) Sanjay Kumar Sharma Pr. Commissioner of Village Om Nagar Income Tax P.O.Budhera Vs. C.R.Building Gurgaon-122001(Haryana) Faridabad PAN : BALPS0709Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. K. Sampath, Adv. & Sh. V. Rajkumar, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Sanjay Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 03/01/2024 Date of Pronouncement 24/01/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM: This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order…

Pawan Kumar, Fatehabad vs. Prcit, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1655/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19 Pawan Kumar Vs. Prcit, Near Aggarsain Chowk, Rohtak Prince Plywood Home, Fuwara Chowk, Fatehabad, Haryana 125050 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Surajbhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 203Section 263Section 28

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Pawan Kumar Vs. PrCIT, Near Aggarsain Chowk, Rohtak Prince Plywood Home, Fuwara Chowk, Fatehabad, Haryana 125050 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Surajbhan Nain, Advocate Shri Mahfuzur Rahman, CA Department by: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 22.11.2023 Date of 24.01.2024 pronouncement: O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.03.2023 of the Ld. Principal Commissioner…

Bharat Bhushan, Karnal Haryana vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karnal

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2715/DEL/2023[218-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2023

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 10(37)(i)Section 28

…t/enhanced compensation stands adjudicated in number of cases by the Tribunal. Reference is invited to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the following cases:- (i) CIT vs. Ghanashyam (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR 1 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (2014) 367 ITR 498 (SC) (iii) 400 ITR 23 (SC) PCIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) (iv) 302 CTR 458 (SC) UOI vs. Hari Singh and Ors. (v) CA No 18475/2017 dated 10.11.2017 ITO vs. Muktanandgiri Maheshgiri. 3. For the sake of ready reference, one such order of the Tribunal in the case of Smt Ramesh Bai vs. ITO, Bhiwani in ITA no. 4193 to 4195/Del/2019 is reproduced herewith:- Bh…

Ashwani Kumar, Gurugram vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1728/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.R Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 10(37)(i)Section 28

…ber of cases by the Tribunal. Reference is invited to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the following cases:- (i) CIT vs. Ghanashyam (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR 1 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya (2014) 367 ITR 498 (SC) (iii) UOI vs. Hari Singh (2018) 91 Taxmann.com 20 (SC) 3. For the sake of ready reference, one such order of the Tribunal in the case of Smt Ramesh Bai vs. ITO, Bhiwani in ITA no. 4193 to 4195/Del/2019 is reproduced herewith:- 1. These three appeals are filed by different assesses of the same family against different orders of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ashwani Kuma…

Virender Rathee, Bahadurgarh vs. ITO Ward-5, Rohtak

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

ITA 693/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargvirender Rathee, Vs. Ito, 7, Vishwa, Jatwara Mohalla, Ward-5, District Jhajjar, Bahadurgarh, Rohtak Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Akrpr2303Q

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Chhikara, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 250Section 28Section 45(5)

…tion Act is not taxable. Therefore, the grievance of the assessee may kindly be allowed. The ld. Counsel of the assessee has also relied on the following judgements:- (i) CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF) [(2009) 8 SCC 412]; (ii) CIT, Rajkot v. Govindbhai Mamiya [(2014) 16 SCC 449]; (iii) Movaliya Bhikhubhai Balabhai v. Income Tax Officer, Surat [(2016) 70 taxmann.com 45 (Gujarat)]; (iv) Union of India & Ors. V. Hari Singh & Ors. [ Civil Appeal No. 15041 of 2017]; (v) Baldev Singh vs. ITO [2019] 104 taxmann.com 99 (Delhi - Trib); & (vi) Mahender Pal Narang v. Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi [(2020) 120 taxmann.com…