CIT v. Kerala Land Development Ltd.

232 ITR 575High Court1998#23812 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 331,145 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 10(46A)Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 144Section 2(15)

Judgments citing CIT v. Kerala Land Development Ltd.

Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur vs. DCIT (Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 666/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 234A

…ad note of following judgment.  ACIT (Exemption) vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority & Ors. (2022) 329 CTR (SC) 297 : (2022) 449 ITR 1 (SC)  CIT vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (2020) 4 NYPCTR 672 (Guj)  CIT V/s Kerala Land Development Ltd. 232 ITR 575 : 1.30. In view of above facts, it is submitted that the ld. CIT(A) and ld. AO were not justified in denying the benefit of exemption u/s 11/12, in view of above decisions and had wrongly treated the appellant as a commercial entity. 2. Re : Gr. No. 2 to 9 : Treating the computing income at Rs 56,79,92,000/- as against Nil income declared : 2.1.…

Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur vs. DCIT (Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 665/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2013-14 Jodhpur Development Authority 1, Opposite Railway Hospital, JDA Circle, Jodhpur. cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jodhpur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAALJ 0478 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by:

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 234A

…ad note of following judgment.  ACIT (Exemption) vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority & Ors. (2022) 329 CTR (SC) 297 : (2022) 449 ITR 1 (SC)  CIT vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (2020) 4 NYPCTR 672 (Guj)  CIT V/s Kerala Land Development Ltd. 232 ITR 575 : 1.30. In view of above facts, it is submitted that the ld. CIT(A) and ld. AO were not justified in denying the benefit of exemption u/s 11/12, in view of above decisions and had wrongly treated the appellant as a commercial entity. 2. Re : Gr. No. 2 to 9 : Treating the computing income at Rs 56,79,92,000/- as against Nil income declared : 2.1.…

ITO, Bhubaneswar vs. Orissa Computer Application Centre, Bhubaneswar

ITA 282/CTK/2015[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Oct 2017AY 2000-01

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR/D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 251

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.282 to 284/CTK/2015 Assessment Years : 2000-2001 to 2002-03 ITO, Ward 5(3), Vs. Orissa Computer Application Bhubaneswar Centre, No.N1/7-D, Acharya Vihar, Bhubaneswar PAN/GIR No.AAAQAO 0246 R (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) C.O.Nos.39 to 41/CT/2015 (arising out of ITA Nos.282 to 284/CTK/2015 Assessment Years : 2000-2001 to 2002-03 Orissa Computer Application Vs. ITO, Ward 5(3), Centre, No.N1/7-D, Acharya Bhubaneswar Vihar, Bhubaneswar PAN/GIR No.AAAQAO 0246…