CIT v. Manjula J. Shah

ITO (It) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Farokh Jal Deboo, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainincome Tax Officer (It)-1(1) Shri Farokh Jal Deboo Room No. 015, Scindia House 24-A, A Block, Usha Sadan Vs. Ballard Pier, Mumbai 400038 Next To Colaba Post Office Colaba, Mumbai 400005 Pan - Aacpd0275C Appellant Respondent Shri Farokh Jal Deboo Income Tax Officer (It)-1(1) 24-A, A Block, Usha Sadan Room No. 015, Scindia House Vs. Next To Colaba Post Office Ballard Pier, Mumbai 400038 Colaba, Mumbai 400005 Pan - Aacpd0275C Appellant Respondent

…ef. In the impugned order, the learned CIT(A): (i) upheld the AO’s action in denying the assessee’s claim for exemption under section 54 of the Act, and (ii) following the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Manjula J. Shah (2013) 355 ITR 474 (Bom) directed the AO to allow indexation of the cost of acquisition w.e.f. 01.04.1981 in respect of the said property. 3. Both Revenue and the assessee are aggrieved by the impugned order of the learned CIT(A)-10, Mumbai dated 26.03.2013 for A.Y. 2009-10 in respect of the issues adjudicated against them. We proceed to dispose off the cross appea…

Farokh Jal Deboo, Mumbai vs. ITO (It) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainincome Tax Officer (It)-1(1) Shri Farokh Jal Deboo Room No. 015, Scindia House 24-A, A Block, Usha Sadan Vs. Ballard Pier, Mumbai 400038 Next To Colaba Post Office Colaba, Mumbai 400005 Pan - Aacpd0275C Appellant Respondent Shri Farokh Jal Deboo Income Tax Officer (It)-1(1) 24-A, A Block, Usha Sadan Room No. 015, Scindia House Vs. Next To Colaba Post Office Ballard Pier, Mumbai 400038 Colaba, Mumbai 400005 Pan - Aacpd0275C Appellant Respondent

…ef. In the impugned order, the learned CIT(A): (i) upheld the AO’s action in denying the assessee’s claim for exemption under section 54 of the Act, and (ii) following the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Manjula J. Shah (2013) 355 ITR 474 (Bom) directed the AO to allow indexation of the cost of acquisition w.e.f. 01.04.1981 in respect of the said property. 3. Both Revenue and the assessee are aggrieved by the impugned order of the learned CIT(A)-10, Mumbai dated 26.03.2013 for A.Y. 2009-10 in respect of the issues adjudicated against them. We proceed to dispose off the cross appea…

ITO 19(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Elsa Silva, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2007-08

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEORE SHRI JASON P. BOAZ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER The Income Tax Officer – 19(3)(1), Room No.307, 3rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai 400 012 ... Appellant Vs. Smt. Elsa Silva, 401, Cozy Dell, St. Andrew Road, Bandra(W), Mumbai – 400050 PAN:ANTPS 7419P .... Respondent Appellant by : Capt. Pradeep Arya Respondent by : Shri Bhupendra Shah Date of hearing : 17/11/2015 Date of pronouncement : 27/11/2015 ORDER PER JASON P. BOAZ, A.M: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CI…

Asst CIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Pushpa Suresh Hira, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “सी” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी शैल" कुमार यादव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी र"मत कोचर, लेखा सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1561/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) A C I T - 19(3) Room No. 305, 3rd Floor Piramal Chambers, Parel अपीलाथ"/Appellant Mumbai 400012 बनाम/ Vs. Smt. Pushpa Suresh Hira Ground Floor, Plot No. 272 ""यथ"/ Hisdustan CHS Ltd., 36th Road Respondent Bandra (W), Mumbai 400050 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN - AAEPH0092B Shri C.W. Angolkar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant…

ACIT 21(1), Mumbai vs. Nirmal B Thakkar, Mumbai

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

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4135/Mum/2010 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08) The Asstt. Commissioner Of बनाम/ M/S Dayal Bapulal Thakkar (Huf), Income Tax 25(2), A-10, Charan Saran, Vile Parle Vs. (Erstwhile Acit-21(1), ) Model Town Co-Op Hsc, Room No.711, C-12, 7Th Floor, Gulmohar X Road No.7, Juhu, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Mumbai-400049 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…prior to 1.4.1981 by following the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of Manjula B Shah. The decision rendered in the case of Manjula B Shah by the Tribunal has since been upheld by the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court and the same is reported in 355 ITR 474. There should not be any dispute that the decision rendered by the jurisdictional High Court is binding on the department. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the decision rendered by Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 19. In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed. Pronounced accordingly on 18th November, 2015. घोष…

ACIT 21(1), Mumbai vs. Dayal Bapulal Thakker, Mumbai

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

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4135/Mum/2010 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08) The Asstt. Commissioner Of बनाम/ M/S Dayal Bapulal Thakkar (Huf), Income Tax 25(2), A-10, Charan Saran, Vile Parle Vs. (Erstwhile Acit-21(1), ) Model Town Co-Op Hsc, Room No.711, C-12, 7Th Floor, Gulmohar X Road No.7, Juhu, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Mumbai-400049 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…prior to 1.4.1981 by following the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of Manjula B Shah. The decision rendered in the case of Manjula B Shah by the Tribunal has since been upheld by the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court and the same is reported in 355 ITR 474. There should not be any dispute that the decision rendered by the jurisdictional High Court is binding on the department. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the decision rendered by Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 19. In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed. Pronounced accordingly on 18th November, 2015. घोष…

ITO 20(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Chandrakant Himatlal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, Cross Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amit Shukla

…Department’s appeal, hence they are dismissed. 10. As regards the issue raised in ground no.3, it has been admitted by both the parties the same is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Manjula J Shah reported in [2013] 355 ITR 474 (Bom). Accordingly, we direct the AO to give benefit of cost of inflation Index for acquisition with reference to the year in which the previous owner had acquired the asset as per the principle laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court. Accordingly, ground no. 3 is treated as allowed. 11. In the result, Cross Objection filed by the ass…