CIT v. R.P Goenka

233 ITR 128Reported decision#15380 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2022.

Issues it is cited on

section 24(b)demergeramalgamationdisallowance under section 14asection 115jdisallowance u/s 14asection 115jbsection 24section 14asection 115section 11section 14

Judgments citing CIT v. R.P Goenka

DCIT Central Circle-30, Delhi vs. Avantha Realty Ltd., Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 936/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. Avantha Realty Ltd, Central Circle-30, 124, Thapar House, Delhi Janpath, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacj8030A Assessee By : Shri Upvan Gupta, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Yamini, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30/11/2022

For Appellant: Shri Upvan Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Yamini, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 24

…under:- “7. We agree with the argument of the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not solely adjudicated based on the earlier assessments but has also so considered the various judgments of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. R.P Goenka (233 ITR 128) and the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Sharma (254 ITR 103) wherein it was held that unpaid price is to be treated as borrowed capital within the meaning of Section 24(b). Hence, on independent examination of the facts and the provisions of law, we hold that the interest paid by the assessee to BIL is an…

DCIT, Circle- 3(2), New Delhi vs. Avantha Realty Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6148/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4360/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4361/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4362/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6147/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 6148/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Vs M/S Avantha Realty Ltd., Circle-3(2), 124, Janpath, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj8030A Assessee By : Sh. Upvan Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Upvan Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 24

…rities. 7. We agree with the argument of the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not solely adjudicated based on the earlier assessments but has also so considered the various judgments of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. R.P Goenka (233 ITR 128) and the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Sharma (254 ITR 103) wherein it was held that unpaid price is to be treated as borrowed capital within the meaning of Section 24(b). Hence, on independent examination of the facts and the provisions of law, we hold that the interest paid by the assessee to BIL is an…

DCIT, Circle- 3(2), New Delhi vs. Avantha Realty Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6147/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4360/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4361/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4362/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6147/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 6148/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Vs M/S Avantha Realty Ltd., Circle-3(2), 124, Janpath, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj8030A Assessee By : Sh. Upvan Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Upvan Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 24

…rities. 7. We agree with the argument of the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not solely adjudicated based on the earlier assessments but has also so considered the various judgments of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. R.P Goenka (233 ITR 128) and the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Sharma (254 ITR 103) wherein it was held that unpaid price is to be treated as borrowed capital within the meaning of Section 24(b). Hence, on independent examination of the facts and the provisions of law, we hold that the interest paid by the assessee to BIL is an…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Avantha Realty Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4362/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4360/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4361/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4362/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6147/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 6148/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Vs M/S Avantha Realty Ltd., Circle-3(2), 124, Janpath, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj8030A Assessee By : Sh. Upvan Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Upvan Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 24

…rities. 7. We agree with the argument of the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not solely adjudicated based on the earlier assessments but has also so considered the various judgments of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. R.P Goenka (233 ITR 128) and the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Sharma (254 ITR 103) wherein it was held that unpaid price is to be treated as borrowed capital within the meaning of Section 24(b). Hence, on independent examination of the facts and the provisions of law, we hold that the interest paid by the assessee to BIL is an…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Avantha Realty Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4361/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4360/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4361/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4362/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6147/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 6148/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Vs M/S Avantha Realty Ltd., Circle-3(2), 124, Janpath, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj8030A Assessee By : Sh. Upvan Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Upvan Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 24

…rities. 7. We agree with the argument of the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not solely adjudicated based on the earlier assessments but has also so considered the various judgments of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. R.P Goenka (233 ITR 128) and the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Sharma (254 ITR 103) wherein it was held that unpaid price is to be treated as borrowed capital within the meaning of Section 24(b). Hence, on independent examination of the facts and the provisions of law, we hold that the interest paid by the assessee to BIL is an…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Avantha Realty Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4360/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4360/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 4361/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 4362/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6147/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 6148/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Dcit, Vs M/S Avantha Realty Ltd., Circle-3(2), 124, Janpath, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj8030A Assessee By : Sh. Upvan Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

For Appellant: Sh. Upvan Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 24

…rities. 7. We agree with the argument of the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not solely adjudicated based on the earlier assessments but has also so considered the various judgments of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. R.P Goenka (233 ITR 128) and the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Sharma (254 ITR 103) wherein it was held that unpaid price is to be treated as borrowed capital within the meaning of Section 24(b). Hence, on independent examination of the facts and the provisions of law, we hold that the interest paid by the assessee to BIL is an…

CIT v. R.P Goenka (233 ITR 128) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax