CIT v. Nitish Rameshchandra Chordia

374 ITR 531High Court2015#15737 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT v. Nitish Rameshchandra Chordia

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune vs. M/S. Renaissance Cultivation LLP, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1416/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1416/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle-2(1), Vs. M/S Renaissance Pune. Cultivation Llp, Pastakiya House, A/P Kamshet Maval, Pune- 410405 Pan : Aaofr7634K Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri J. P. Chadraker Assessee By Shri Neelesh Khandelwal : Date Of Hearing : 16.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Pune [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 21.03.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Revenue Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Entire Facts Of The Case.

For Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

Section 143(3)

…investments subsequently. (ii) Once the lands are held to be agricultural lands, the gains arising on sale of said lands cannot be brought to tax as business income as held by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nitish Rameshchandra Chordia, 374 ITR 531 (Bom.) wherein, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court after referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of D.L.F. United Ltd. vs. CIT, 129 CTR 33 (Delhi) held that any gains arising on sale of agricultural land/property cannot be considered as business income. The relevant part of the said decision is reproduced as under :- “13.…

The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(3), Surat vs. Shri Dhirubhai Becharbhai Dhameliya, Surat

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 259/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 254(1)

…ee also relied on CBDT Circular No.17/2015 dated 06.10.2015 wherein it was clarified that distance has to be measured aerially in respect of agricultural land. The assessee explained that after the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Smt. Maltibai R Kadu 374 ITR 531 (Bom), the CBDT issued said circular and clarified that distance between the Municipal limit and agriculture land to be measured aerially. The assessee submitted that the said circular is to be the circular is to be applied prospectively from A.Y. 2014-15 as clarified ITA No.258 & 259/SRT/2018 (AY 2013-14) Shri Manubhai Rajabhai Dhameliya in par…

Dy. CIT, Circle 3(3), Surat vs. Shri Manubhai Rajabhai Dhameliya, Surat

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 258/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 254(1)

Sandeep Premchand Agarwal, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2957/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri HarikrishanFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg

Section 2(14)(iii)Section 234B

…at an illegal conclusion of the distance of land in question from municipal limited. In the process, the CIT(A) ignored the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Nitish Rameshchandra Chordia reported as 374 ITR 531. 6. Before me, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee explained the above issue and submitted the issue stands covered by the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Nitish Rameshchandra Chordia (supra). He further stated that the amended provision of section 2(14)(iii) is only applicable…

Yatin Hariram Ruparel, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2424/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2424/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Yatin Hariram Ruparel Ito-17(3)(4), बनाम/ 7, View Villa, Piramal Chambers, 425, Shradhanand Cross Road, Lalbaug, Parel-12 Vs. Matunga, Mumbai-400 019 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacpr 2921 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Dinesh Shah ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Airiju Jaikaran सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 20.6.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 04.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 07.2.2014, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 28.12.2011. 2. The Issue Arising In The Instant Appeal, Raised Per Several Grounds, Is The Exigibility To Tax Of The Gains Arising To The Assessee On The Sale Of His Interest In A Land And, In Case Taxable, The Value & The Manner Of Taxability Of Such Gain Under The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)

…erred to during hearing, much less read thereat. The issues arising and decided by us are principally factual, so that the same would be of little moment. As regards the legal issue, qua which the assessee relied on CIT vs. Nitish Rameshchandra Chordia [2015] 374 ITR 531 (Bom), we have restored the matter back to the file of the first appellate authority, who shall decide the same, determining the facts, in accordance with law, and before whom the assessee shall be at liberty to rely on any decision deemed proper. 5.5 We decide accordingly. 6. In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purp…

DCIT 9(2), Mumbai vs. Dhiren P. Dalal, Mumbai

In the result, both revenue’s appeal and assessee’s CO stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5164/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 10(1)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “डी” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI "ी आर सी शमा", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी अिमत शु"ला, "याियक सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI R C SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. : 5164/Mum/2014 (Assessment year: 2009-10) "ी धीरेन पी दलाल DCIT -9(2), Vs R.No.218, 2nd Floor, Shri Dhiren P Dalal, Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No.33-ABCD Govt Indl. M K Road, Estate Charkop, Mumbai -400 020 Kandviali (West) Mumbai -400 067 PAN:AABPD 5224 C ""यथ" (Respondent) अपीलाथ" (Appellant) CO No. : 15/Mum/2015 Arising out of ITA No. : 5164/Mum/2014, AY 2009-10…