CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody

115 ITR 519Supreme Court of India1978#191 most cited

What is CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody authority for?

For deductions under Section 57(iii) relating to "Income from Other Sources," an expenditure is allowable if it is laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning such income, even if no income is actually earned in that previous year.

386

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody · Rajendra Prasad Moody · 115 ITR 519 · Section 57(iii) · Income from Other Sources · deductibility of expenditure · expenses without income · wholly and exclusively · purpose of making income · Section 14A distinction · disallowance of expenses

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 57(iii)Section 1961Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 68Section 36(1)(iii)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 57(iii)section 57disallowance u/s 14adisallowance under section 14asection 14acapital expendituresection 37(1)income from other sourcessection 37salaryprevious yearsection 10

Judgments citing CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody

M/S.Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. P. Ltd, Munnar vs. The ACIT, Cochin

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 78/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…ITA Nos. 77, 78, & 91//C/2017 & 131,163&164/C/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH KOCHI BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JM & MANJUNATHA G., AM ITA Nos.77, 78 & 91/1Coch/2017 (Asst Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ) M/s. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. Vs The Asst. Commr. Of Income tax, Pvt. Ltd. KDHP House, Door No. Circle-1(2), Kochi IX/2226, N.H. 47, Devikulam, Munnar, Idukki-685 612. ( Appellant-Assessee) (Respondent-Revenue) ITA Nos.131, 163 164/Coch/2017 (Asst Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ) The Asst. Commr. Of Income tax, Vs M/s. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Circle-1(2),…

M/S.Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. P. Ltd, Munnar vs. The ACIT, Cochin

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 77/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…ITA Nos. 77, 78, & 91//C/2017 & 131,163&164/C/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH KOCHI BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JM & MANJUNATHA G., AM ITA Nos.77, 78 & 91/1Coch/2017 (Asst Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ) M/s. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. Vs The Asst. Commr. Of Income tax, Pvt. Ltd. KDHP House, Door No. Circle-1(2), Kochi IX/2226, N.H. 47, Devikulam, Munnar, Idukki-685 612. ( Appellant-Assessee) (Respondent-Revenue) ITA Nos.131, 163 164/Coch/2017 (Asst Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ) The Asst. Commr. Of Income tax, Vs M/s. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Circle-1(2),…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co., P. Ltd, Idukki

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 164/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…ITA Nos. 77, 78, & 91//C/2017 & 131,163&164/C/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH KOCHI BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JM & MANJUNATHA G., AM ITA Nos.77, 78 & 91/1Coch/2017 (Asst Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ) M/s. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. Vs The Asst. Commr. Of Income tax, Pvt. Ltd. KDHP House, Door No. Circle-1(2), Kochi IX/2226, N.H. 47, Devikulam, Munnar, Idukki-685 612. ( Appellant-Assessee) (Respondent-Revenue) ITA Nos.131, 163 164/Coch/2017 (Asst Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ) The Asst. Commr. Of Income tax, Vs M/s. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Circle-1(2),…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co., P. Ltd, Idukki

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed

ITA 163/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G., Am

Section 80I

…ITA Nos. 77, 78, & 91//C/2017 & 131,163&164/C/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH KOCHI BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JM & MANJUNATHA G., AM ITA Nos.77, 78 & 91/1Coch/2017 (Asst Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ) M/s. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. Vs The Asst. Commr. Of Income tax, Pvt. Ltd. KDHP House, Door No. Circle-1(2), Kochi IX/2226, N.H. 47, Devikulam, Munnar, Idukki-685 612. ( Appellant-Assessee) (Respondent-Revenue) ITA Nos.131, 163 164/Coch/2017 (Asst Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 ) The Asst. Commr. Of Income tax, Vs M/s. Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Circle-1(2),…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Manpower Group Services India Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Manpower Services India Pvt. Ltd), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 2312/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 2312/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Dcit, Vs M/S Manpower Group Services India Circle-16(1), Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As New Delhi Manpower Services India Pvt. Ltd.), 371, Aggarwal Millennium Tower-Ii, Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi-110034 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcm6914F Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.12.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.12.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 25.02.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-19, New Delhi

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…9,838/- made by the AO u/s 14A of the Act without considering a legal principle that allowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon the earning of the income as upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519? 4. That the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 5. That the grounds of appeal are without prejudiced to each other. 6. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or forgo any ground(s) of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4. From the above grounds, it is gathered tha…

M/S. Volvo India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1353/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Lalit Kumarm/S.Volvo India Private Limited, Yalachahally Village, Tavarakere Post, Hoskote, Bangalore – 562 122. Pan: Aaacv 6747N … Appellant Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu, … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 234CSection 234DSection 92C

…hat there was no need to incur such expenditure. While coming to this conclusion, the Hon'ble High Court has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Eastern Investments Ltd. v. CIT [1957] 20 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC). It has been held by the Hon'ble High Court that: 'It has been held by our courts that it is not for the revenue authorities to dictate to the assessee as to how he should conduct his business and it is not for them to tell the assessee as to what expenditure the assessee can incur. We may refer to a few of these authorities to elucidate the…

Analjit Singh, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 16(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4737/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Kant

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50D

…the cost of assets is contrary to the settled legal position and, therefore, needs to be rejected. He further submitted that the reference of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra 132 | P a g e I.T.A .No.-4737/Del/2017 Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519) by the revenue during the course of argument to canvass that shares borrowed from loan amount cannot be allowed, is also misplaced as in the said decision, the finding of fact was that the assessee was invested in shares using interest bearing borrowed funds for the purpose of earning dividend income therefrom and the question before the Hon’ble…

M/S.Hll Lifecare Ltd(Previously Known As Hindustan Latex Ltd), Trivandrum vs. The ACIT, Trivandrum

ITA 32/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Govind ShastriFor Respondent: Sri. A.Dhanaraj, Sr.DR

…India (P) Ltd. (supra) does not specifically deal with this issue. ITA Nos.30,31 & 32/Coch/2016 10 M/s.HLL Lifecare Limited. 22. It was suggested by Mr. Hossain that, in the context of Section 57(iii), the Supreme Court in CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 explained that deduction is allowable even where income was not actually earned in the A.Y. in question. This aspect of the matter was dealt with by this Court in Cheminvest Ltd. (supra) where it reversed the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT by observing as under: “20. Since the Special Bench has relied upon the decision of the Supreme…

M/S.Hll Lifecare Ltd(Previously Known As Hindustan Latex Ltd), Trivandrum vs. The ACIT, Trivandrum

ITA 31/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Govind ShastriFor Respondent: Sri. A.Dhanaraj, Sr.DR

…India (P) Ltd. (supra) does not specifically deal with this issue. ITA Nos.30,31 & 32/Coch/2016 10 M/s.HLL Lifecare Limited. 22. It was suggested by Mr. Hossain that, in the context of Section 57(iii), the Supreme Court in CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 explained that deduction is allowable even where income was not actually earned in the A.Y. in question. This aspect of the matter was dealt with by this Court in Cheminvest Ltd. (supra) where it reversed the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT by observing as under: “20. Since the Special Bench has relied upon the decision of the Supreme…

M/S.Hll Lifecare Ltd(Previously Known As Hindustan Latex Ltd), Trivandrum vs. The ACIT, Trivandrum

ITA 30/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Govind ShastriFor Respondent: Sri. A.Dhanaraj, Sr.DR

…India (P) Ltd. (supra) does not specifically deal with this issue. ITA Nos.30,31 & 32/Coch/2016 10 M/s.HLL Lifecare Limited. 22. It was suggested by Mr. Hossain that, in the context of Section 57(iii), the Supreme Court in CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 explained that deduction is allowable even where income was not actually earned in the A.Y. in question. This aspect of the matter was dealt with by this Court in Cheminvest Ltd. (supra) where it reversed the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT by observing as under: “20. Since the Special Bench has relied upon the decision of the Supreme…

ITO, Bangalore vs. M/S Safran Engineering Services India Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 451/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raoit(Tp)A No.451/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Ms.Neera Malhaotra, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri K.R.Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 92C

…such expenditure. While coming to this conclusion, the Hon’ble High Court has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Eastern IT(TP)A No.451/Bang/2015 Page 15 of 23 Investments Ltd. vs. CIT (20 ITR 1)(SC) and CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519)(SC). It has been held by the Hon’ble High Court that : “It has been held by our courts that it is not for the revenue authorities to dictate to the assessee as to how he should conduct his business and it is not for them to tell the assessee as to what expenditure the assessee can incur. We may refer to a few of these authorities to elucidate th…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Milkfood Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1227/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan, Vp & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील सं अपील सं सं./I.T.A. No.1227/Del/2016 सं (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) वष" Assistant Commissioner Of Milkfood Limited 5Th Floor Income Tax Central Circle-4 Bhandari House बनाम नाम नाम/ नाम (Erstwhile Cc-25) 91, Nehru Place Vs. Room No. 331, Ara Centre Delhi Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi. ःथायी लेखा ःथायी लेखा सं सं./जीआइआर जीआइआर सं सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcm-5913-B ःथायी ःथायी लेखा लेखा सं सं जीआइआर जीआइआर सं सं (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (ू"यथ" ू"यथ" ू"यथ" / Respondent) ू"यथ" : Revenue By : Shri Pranav Kumar, Ld. Sr.Dr Assessee By : Shri R.S.Singhvi, Ca सुनवाई क" सुनवाई क" तार"ख तार"ख / सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तार"ख तार"ख : 16/11/2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा घोषणा क" घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तार"ख क" तार"ख तार"ख / तार"ख : 17/11/2017 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R.S.Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pranav Kumar, Ld. Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…sion in Taikisha Engineering India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) does not specifically deal with this issue. 22. It was suggested by Mr. Hossain that, in the context of Section 57(iii), the Supreme Court in Commissioner Of Income Tax, West v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC) explained that deduction is allowable even where income was not actually earned in the AY in question. This aspect of the matter was dealt with by this Court in M/s Cheminvest Ltd. (supra) where it reversed the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT by observing as under: "20. Since the Special Bench has relied upon the decision of the Su…

DCIT Cir 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sbi Commercial & International Bank Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5757/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sktijit Dey () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…A. Y. 2010-11, the action of the 2 A.O. was upheld by Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of the Chemivest Ltd. Vs. /TO (2009) 121 lTD 318 (Delhi ITAT) (SB), which was vest on the decision of the Hon. Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519) (SC) wherein also the identical issue was involved.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, a banking company, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2011-12 on 29-11-2011 declaring total income of Rs.2,03,90,830. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued. In response to notice…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Arun Dagar, Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4565/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 24Section 56Section 57(3)

…t income earned on advance made to M/s. Omaxe Limited should be allowed to be deducted from the said interest income u/s 57 (iii) of the Act?” 9. Ld. CIT (A), by relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court cited as CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody – (1978) 115 ITR 519, held that the interest expenditure incurred by the assessee on the loan availed of from Reliance Capital Limited is directly related to interest income earned on advance made to M/s. Omaxe Limited and as such, it is allowable. However, the ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the order passed by AO. 10. When we examine the facts of this case, i…

DCIT, Nederland vs. Sh. Arun Dagar, Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3394/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 24Section 56Section 57(3)

…t income earned on advance made to M/s. Omaxe Limited should be allowed to be deducted from the said interest income u/s 57 (iii) of the Act?” 9. Ld. CIT (A), by relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court cited as CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody – (1978) 115 ITR 519, held that the interest expenditure incurred by the assessee on the loan availed of from Reliance Capital Limited is directly related to interest income earned on advance made to M/s. Omaxe Limited and as such, it is allowable. However, the ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the order passed by AO. 10. When we examine the facts of this case, i…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Delhi Press Samachar Patra Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1433/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…iming the deduction to show that any profit was in fact earned by the expenditure in question. (Moore v/s Stewarts (6 TC 625).This principle has been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Eastern Investment Ltd v/s CIT (20 ITR 1) & CIT v/s Rajendra Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519) . Lord Thankerton said in Hughes v/s Bank of New Zealand,(6 ITR 636) that expenditure in course of trade which is unremunerative is none the less a proper deduction ,if wholly and exclusively made for the purpose of the trade. It does not require the presence of a receipt on the credit side to justify the deduction of an expense. Apart from this…

Dwarka Prasad Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4592/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “डी”, म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T.GARASIA, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM I.T.A. No.4591 and 4592/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 and 2011-12) Shri Dwarka Prasad Agarwal, Income Tax Officer 21(3)(1), बनाम/ 113/114 Samundra Mahal, Worli, Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai-400018 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : ACXPA2281J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : I.T.A. No.1055/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Asstt.CIT -21(2), Smt.Kiran Aggarwal, बनाम/ Room No.115, 113/114 Samundra Mahal, 1st floor, Piramal Chamber…

Dwarka Prasad Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 21(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4591/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “डी”, म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T.GARASIA, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM I.T.A. No.4591 and 4592/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 and 2011-12) Shri Dwarka Prasad Agarwal, Income Tax Officer 21(3)(1), बनाम/ 113/114 Samundra Mahal, Worli, Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai-400018 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : ACXPA2281J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : I.T.A. No.1055/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Asstt.CIT -21(2), Smt.Kiran Aggarwal, बनाम/ Room No.115, 113/114 Samundra Mahal, 1st floor, Piramal Chamber…

ACIT 21(2), Mumbai vs. Kiran Aggarwal, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1055/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri B Puresh
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “डी”, म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T.GARASIA, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM I.T.A. No.4591 and 4592/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 and 2011-12) Shri Dwarka Prasad Agarwal, Income Tax Officer 21(3)(1), बनाम/ 113/114 Samundra Mahal, Worli, Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai-400018 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : ACXPA2281J (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : I.T.A. No.1055/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Asstt.CIT -21(2), Smt.Kiran Aggarwal, बनाम/ Room No.115, 113/114 Samundra Mahal, 1st floor, Piramal Chamber…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Ranjan Dagar, Delhi

ITA 3346/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Senior DR
Section 24Section 57(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘F’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3346/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) ITO, Ward 47 (2), vs. Shri Ranjan Dagar, New Delhi. BK – 16, Shalimar Bagh West, Delhi – 110 088. (PAN : ADKPD7090A) ITA No.4602/Del./2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) ACIT, Circle 47 (1), vs. Shri Ranjan Dagar, New Delhi. BK – 16, Shalimar Bagh West, Delhi – 110 088. (PAN : ADKPD7090A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri Atiq Ahmad, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 21.09.2017 Date of Order : 22.09.…