CIT v. Kumar Rani Meenakshi Achi (207)

292 ITR 624High Court2007#5255 most cited

What is CIT v. Kumar Rani Meenakshi Achi (207) authority for?

When an assessee is a co-owner of property, they cannot be treated indifferently, and it would be a travesty of justice to single out one co-owner for an enhanced assessment on the same property.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kumar Rani Meenakshi Achi · section 143 · section 143(3) · co-owner · indifferent treatment · travesty of justice · assessment procedure · detailed scrutiny assessment · total income

Sections most often in play

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(x)

Issues it is cited on

section 143section 14section 143(3)total income

Judgments citing CIT v. Kumar Rani Meenakshi Achi (207)

RAMESHCHANDRA CHHABILDAS JHAVERI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3520/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 56(2)(x)

…the assessee cannot be treated indifferently as has been held in a series of decisions  Rajeshkumar Shantilal Patel v. ITO (127 taxmann.com 342),  Pankaj Inder Wadhwa v. ITO for A.Y. 2019-20 in ITA No. 1733/Mum/2025,  CIT v. Kumararani Smt. Meenakshi Achi (292 ITR 624) (Mad),  Jaswant Rai v. CWT (107 ITR 477) (P&H),  Ms. Viramati H. Dalal v. ITO [58 taxmann.com 331 (Mum-Trib)],  Pradeep Bansal v. ACIT [155 taxmann.com 663 (Del-Trib),  Sangram J. Patel v. DCIT [ITA No. 377/Ahd/2018 (Ahd-Trib)],  Babubhai Shantilal Solanki v. ITO [ITA No. 1893/Ahd/2019 (Ahd-Trib)],  Shri Vipul Krishna Ashtekar and Ors. v.…

SH. CHANDRA KANT CHAHAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2813/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shrim. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Alok jain, Adv.; &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 50C

…to us in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.” 10. Following the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Jaswant Rai Vs. CWT (supra) the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kumararani Smt. Meenakshi Achi [(2007) 292 ITR 624 (Mad)] held as under:- “6. Learned counsel for the Revenue contends that the Tribunal erred in deciding the issue without going into the merits of the case, merely on the basis of the co-owner's case being I.T.A. No. 2813/Del/2017 dropped; and that the registered valuer had taken a sale of ½ ground of land in 1995 and worked backwards, wherea…

RAJENDRAPRASAD BABULAL KHETAN,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR. - 4, SURAT

ITA 142/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.142/Srt/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Rajendraprasad Babulal Khetan, Vs. The Acit, E-2-1101, Capital Greens, Vesu Central Circle-4, – Bharthana, Surat – 395007. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abqpk8161R (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील (खोज और ज"ती) सं./It(Ss)A Nos.32/Srt/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rajendraprasad Babulal Khetan, Vs. The Acit, E-2-1101, Capital Greens, Vesu Central Circle-4, – Bharthana, Surat – 395007. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abqpk8161R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 150(1)Section 154

…submits that being co-owner the assessee is also entitled for similar treatment. The Revenue cannot treat the assessee indifferently. In support of his submission the AR relied upon the decision of Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Kumar Rani Meenakshi Achi (207) 292 ITR 624 (Mad), ITA.142/SRT/2023, IT(SS)A.32, 65 – 67/SRT/2023 & Cos. 11 -12/SRT/2023 Rajendraprasad Babulal Khetan decision of Ahmedabad Bench in Chetanbhai Prahaldbhai Gami Vs. ITO (ITA No. 2082/Ahd/2013) dated 19.07.2019 and CBDT Circular No.014(XL-35) dated 11.04.1955 1. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue supported the order of Lower Autho…

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD vs. VEDULA VENKATA RAMANA, L/R OF LATE SMT. V. RAJYALAKSHMI,, HYDERABAD

ITA 1554/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…would be travesty of justice if one of the co-owners is solely picked out and an enhanced income for the same property is attributed in his hands. Similar view taken by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kumararani Smt. Meenakshi Achi (2007) 292 ITR 624. This view is followed by the Tribunal in the case of Sri Hemanth B. Motadu vs. ITO, ITA No. 283/Pune/2014, Page 7 of 9 dated 30/05/2017. This decision applies on all fours to the facts of this case also. 18. Respectfully following the view taken by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Muthukarupan and CIT vs. Kumararani Smt. Mee…

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 375/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 374/CHNY/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 373/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 372/CHNY/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 371/CHNY/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 396/CHNY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 395/CHNY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 394/CHNY/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 393/CHNY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 392/CHNY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी मंजूनाथा.जी, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 & ITA Nos.374 & 375/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 v. Ms.Rekha Chawla, The Asst. Commissioner- No.15, “Gurukripa”, of Income Tax, Vidhyalaya Road, Central Circle, Opp. Ramakrishna Park, Salem. Salem-636 007. [PAN: ACHPR 4894 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं…

PRAVINBHAI KESHAVBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(8)`, SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 109/SRT/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.109/Srt/2020 (Ay 2015-16) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Pravinbhai Keshavbhai Patel Income Tax A/2,Golden Park Society, Officer,Ward-1(3)(8), Vs Opp. Primearcade, Anand Aaykar Bhavan, Anavil Mahal Road, Adajan, Surat- Business Center, Adajan 395003 Hazira Road, Adajan, Pan : Asfpp 4549 L Surat-395009 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69Section 69C

…on 143(3) of the Act. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that being co-owner the assessee is also entitled for similar treatment. 5. In support of his submission the AR relied upon the decision of Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Kumar Rani Meenakshi Achi (2007) 292 ITR 624 (Mad), decision of Ahmedabad Bench in Chetanbhai Prahaldbhai Gami Vs. ITO (ITA No. 2082/Ahd/2013). 6. On the other hand, the Sr. DR for the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue further submits that the explanation furnished by the assessee is not supported by documentary evidence or any confirmatio…

SMT PRAVINABEN PATEL,ADAJAN vs. ITO, WARD-1(3)(8), SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 110/SRT/2020[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Surat02 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 115BSection 131Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…on 143(3) of the Act. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that being co-owner the assessee is also entitled for similar treatment. 6. In support of his submission the AR relied upon the decision of Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Kumar Rani Meenakshi Achi (2007) 292 ITR 624 (Mad), decision of Ahmedabad Bench in Chetanbhai Prahaldbhai Gami Vs. ITO (ITA No. 2082/Ahd/2013). 7. On the other hand, the Sr. DR for the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue further submits that the explanation furnished by the assessee is not supported by documentary 4 Smt. PravinabenPravinbha…

ITO 25(2)(5), MUMBAI vs. KIRIT RAOJIBHAI PATEL, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the learned AO is dismissed

ITA 2339/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Sri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm The Income Tax Officer- Kirit Raojibhai Patel 25(2)(5) 5Th Floor Ram Niwas, 34, Room No. 506, C-10, Vallabhnagar, N.S. Road, Vs. Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bkc, Juhu, Vile Parele(W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabpp3139J Assessee Represented By : Shri Rashmikant Choksey, Ar Department Represented By : Shri K.K. Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2022

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2Section 45Section 50Section 54Section 54F

…cord. He further held that two different decisions were never meant to be given in the case of two co-owner brothers and it would be absolutely illegal to treat the two coowners differently relying on the decision of CIT versus Kumarnee Srimati Minakshi Achie 292 ITR 624 (madras) (2007). Accordingly he held that that the amount received by the appellant are capital receipts and further respectfully following the various decisions of the coordinate bench as he held that the amount received by the appellant against sale of transferable development rights/floor space index rights are chargeable to capital gain tax.…

ITO WARD-1(3) (6),, SURAT vs. DEVSHIBHAI JETHABHAI SHETA(HUF),, SURAT,

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee is dismissed as infractious

ITA 1678/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Apr 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1678/Ahd/2017, िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 (Hearing In Virtual Court) Ito Ward -1(3)(6), Vs Devshibhai Jethabhai Sheta Room No.303, (Huf), Anavil Bussiness Centre , D-702, Mahadev Residency, Near Adajan Brts, Anand Mahal Road, Adajan, Surat -395009 Surat [Pan: Aaehd 3710 J] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Co. No.01/Srt/2021 In Ita No.1678/Ahd/2017 (Ay 2008-09) Devshibhai Jethabhai Sheta Vs Ito Ward -1(3)(6), (Huf), Room No.303, D-702, Mahadev Residency, Anavil Bussiness Centre , Anand Mahal Road, Adajan, Near Adajan Brts, Surat Surat -395009 [Pan: Aaehd 3710 J] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shritinish Mody Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Smt. Usha Shorte Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 15.04.2021 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement On: 19.04.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Judical Memebr: 1. This Appeal By Revenue & Cross Objection Therein By Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Hereinafter Referred As “Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Surat, Dated 06.04.2017 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09. The Revenue Has Raised Ground Following Grounds Of Appeal;

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…ither their cases were reopened nor any addition was made. The revenue cannot treat the assessee indifferently on similar transaction. In support of his submission the AR relied upon the decision of Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Kumar Rani Meenakshi Achi (207) 292 ITR 624 (Mad), decision of Ahmedabad Bench in Chetanbhai Prahaldbhai Gami Vs. ITO (ITA No. 2082/Ahd/2013) dated 19.07.2019 and CBDT Circular No.014(XL-35) dated 11.04.1955 and decision of this Bench in case of late Shri Mohanlal Ambelal Desai through L/h Alka Mohanlal Desai ITA No. 1570/AHD/2015 dated 15.12.2020. 9. On the other hand the ld. Sr DR for th…

SHRI GANPATBHAI JETHABHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 398/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2019AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, and Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 55(2)(ii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’C’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE, SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.170/AHD/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Income-tax Officer, Shri Ganpatbhai Jethabhai Ward-9(2), Vs. Patel, Ahmedabad. 5, Surdhara Society, Post Khodiyanagar, Nikol Gam Road, Ahmedabad. PAN: ABXPP1769M आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.398/AHD/2012 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Shri Ganpatbhai Jethabhai Income-tax Officer, Patel, Vs. Ward-9(2), 5, Surdhara Society, Ahmedabad. Post Khodiyanagar, Nikol Gam Road, A…

SHRI LAXMANBHAI JIVRAJBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 421/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 421/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 ) बनाम/ Laxmanbhai Jivrajbhai Patel The Dcit M/S.Shree Krishna Vijay Saw Circle-5(3) Vs. Mills Ahmedabad Lati Gbazar Zone-3 Geeta Mandir Ahmedabad-380 022 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abhpp 3999 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.J. Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Nilam Das Gupta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 08/05/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 17/06/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–5, Ahmedabad [Cit(A) In Short] Vide Appeal No.Cit(A)-5/Dcit Cir.5(3)/10530/2017-18 Dated 08/12/2017 Arising In The Assessment Order Passed Under S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 16/02/2016 Relevant To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- Laxmanbhai Jivrajbhai Patel Vs.Dcit Asst.Year - 2013-14 1. The Cit(Appeals) Erred In Not Granting Deduction Of Rs.94,90,000/- Paid Towards Cancellation Of Banakhat While Computing The Short Term Capital Gains, Which Arose On Sale Of Agricultural Land. The Appellant Reserves Its Right To Add, Amend, Alter Or Modify Any Of The Grounds Stated Hereinabove Either Before Or At The Time Of Hearing. The Only Issue Raised By The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Not Granting The Deduction Amounting To Rs. 94,90,000/- Paid Towards Cancellation Of Banakhat Against The Income Under The Head Capital Gain.

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilam Das Gupta, Sr.DR

…/disturbed in the case of another co-owner. Regarding this, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v/s Laxmanbhai Jivrajbhai Patel vs.DCIT Asst.Year - 2013-14 Kumararani Smt. Meenakshi Achi reported in 292 ITR 624 wherein it was held as under: “It is trite that if during the same assessment year, the same quantity of wealth in possession of one co-sharer is subjected to a lower rate of taxation, it would be highly improper to burden a similarly situated co-sharer with a higher rate of tax. If such an action on the part of the assessing authorities is sanct…

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Kumar Rani Meenakshi Achi (207) (292 ITR 624) — Cited in 22 Judgments | BharatTax