CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas

41 ITR 367Supreme Court of India1961#692 most cited

What is CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas authority for?

Income is diverted by an overriding charge, and thus not taxable, when it never truly accrues to the assessee due to a prior obligation. Conversely, income that first accrues to the assessee and is then applied to discharge an obligation out of that income is taxable.

146

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas · 41 ITR 367 SC · diversion of income by overriding charge · application of income · income never reached assessee · assessable income test · obligation to apply income · right to receive income · taxability of income · overriding obligation principle

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 142(1)Section 14ASection 199Section 80IASection 263Section 90(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(4)(i)section 90(1)section 80ia(4)infrastructure facilitydeduction under section 80iasection 199right to receiveapplication of incomededuction u/s 80iasection 80iasection 90section 45

Judgments citing CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas

DCIT - 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Tourism Development Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 6426/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 6425/Mum/2017 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2011-12) आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 6426/Mum/2017 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 1140/Mum/2017 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Maharashtra Tourism Tax, Circle 1(2)(2), Development Corporation Room No. 535, 5 Th Floor, Aayakar Ltd. फनाभ/ Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 C.D.O. Hutments, Opp. Lic 020 Bldg, Mada Cama Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aaacm0712G अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Mamta Bansal, Cit Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri Anil Sathe, Ar ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 27.07.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: These Appeals Of The Revenue Are Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-8, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], Mr. Rajen Rasiklal Vora; Ay 10-11 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-8/It-365 & 366/15-16, Cit(A)- 2/It/10479/2016-17 Vide Dated 07.08.2017, 17.12.2018. The Assessments Were Framed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 3(2), Mumbai (In Short Ito/ Ao) For The A.Ys. 2011-12, 2012- 13, 2014-15 Vide Order Dated 01.03.2013, 27.03.2015, 28.12.2016 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Mamta Bansal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sathe, AR
Section 143(3)

…grants. A copy of ICDS VII is already included in the factual paper- book. (Please refer page no. 114 to 116 of the factual paper-book)”. 9. He has further relied upon following case laws :- Over-riding title of the Government • CIT VS Sitaldas Tirathdas (41 ITR 367) Interest being characterized in the nature of grant • CIT vs. SAR Infracon (P) Ltd. (Guj) 42 taxmann.com 405 • CIT vs. Karnataka State Agricultural Produce Processing & Export Corporation Ltd. (Kar) 57 taxmann.com 349 Mr. Rajen Rasiklal Vora; AY 10-11 • CIT & Anr. Vs. Karnataka Urban Infrastructure Development & Finance Corporation (Kar) 203 C…

Church of Christ, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemptions-4, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1688/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonya.Y. 2012-13 Church Of Christ, Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad. (Exemptions)-4, Pan: Aabtc 3506 E Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri A.V. Raghuram Revenue By Sri D.J. Prabhakar Anand, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16/06/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/07/2021 Order

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…s.” While holding so, the Hon’ble High Court had considered the decision of the Hon’ble Privy Council in the case Raja Bejoy Singh Budhuria vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengal reported in [1993] 1 ITR 135; Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sitaldas Tirathdas 41 ITR 367 (SC); Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. T. Jayachandran [2018] 406 ITR 1 (SC) and Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Madras Race Club [1996] 219 ITR 39 (Mad.). It is pertinent to mention that the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has enlightened the concept of “diversion of income by overriding title” keeping in view of the decisions of the Higher Judi…

M/S P. Balasubba Setty & Son, Hospet vs. Pr. CIT, Gulbarga

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment years under consideration stands partly allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 417/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Prashanth, C.A &For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

…of R & R plan, which would be deducted from sale proceeds. This was one of the conditions for resuming mining operations under Category 'B'. We refer to and rely on observations by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs Sitaldas Tirathdas reported in (1961) 41 ITR 367. Hon'ble Supreme Court laying down following principal referred to various rulings that illustrated aspects of diversion of income by overriding title. "These are the cases which have considered the problem from various angles. Some of them appear to have applied the principle correctly and some, not. But we do not propose to examine the correctne…

DCIT - 1(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Tourism Development Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the revenue appeals stand dismissed

ITA 6423/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

…ee, either due to contractual obligation or exercise of discretion, it is called as application of income. The essential aspects of the concept of diversion of income can be understood from decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas (1961) 41 ITR 367 (SC). The Apex Court laid out the tests for determining when an income can be said to have been diverted at source as a result of a charge or overriding title. The following is the observation of the Apex Court in Sitaldas Tirathdas's case: "The true test is whether the amounts sought to be deducted, in truth, never reached the assessee as his in…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…ods Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 325 ITR 540 (SC), to constitute ‘income’, the recipient must have control over it. He also relied on various judicial pronouncements as follows:- (1) Dy. CIT v. Dipesh Chandak [2007] 10 TTJ (Pat) 366 (2) CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas [1961] 41 ITR 367 (SC) (3) CIT v. United Breweries Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 547 (Karn) ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Page 20 of 70 (4) CIT v. Pandavapura Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd. (1988) 174 ITR 475 (Kar) approved by Supreme Court in 400 ITR 1 (SC). (5) CIT v. Nagarbail Salt Owners Co-op Society Ltd. [2017] 390 ITR 415 (Kar) (6) Pr. CIT v. Gyan Enterprises Pvt. LTd…

Sri. B. Rudragouda, Bellary vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…ods Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 325 ITR 540 (SC), to constitute ‘income’, the recipient must have control over it. He also relied on various judicial pronouncements as follows:- (1) Dy. CIT v. Dipesh Chandak [2007] 10 TTJ (Pat) 366 (2) CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas [1961] 41 ITR 367 (SC) (3) CIT v. United Breweries Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 547 (Karn) ITA Nos.314 & 315/Bang/2020 Page 20 of 70 (4) CIT v. Pandavapura Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd. (1988) 174 ITR 475 (Kar) approved by Supreme Court in 400 ITR 1 (SC). (5) CIT v. Nagarbail Salt Owners Co-op Society Ltd. [2017] 390 ITR 415 (Kar) (6) Pr. CIT v. Gyan Enterprises Pvt. LTd…

M/S Muneer Enterprises, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 696/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Shiv Prasad Reddy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT
Section 37(1)

…R & R plan, which would be deducted from sale proceeds. This was one of the conditions for resuming mining operations under Categories ’B’. We refer to and rely on observations by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs Sitaldas Tirathdas reported in (1961) 41 ITR 367. Hon’ble Supreme Court laying down following principal referred to various rulings that illustrated aspects of diversion of income by overriding title. “These are the cases which have considered the problem from various angles. Some of them appear to have applied the principle correctly and some, not. But we do not propose to examine the correctn…

Ashwathnarayana Singh and Co, Bellry vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

In the result appeal is filed by assessee for year under consideration stands allowed

ITA 522/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Laxminiwas Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Muzaffar Hussain, CIT (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 37

…ing of R & R plan, which would be deducted from sale proceeds. This was one of the conditions for resuming mining operations under Category ’B’. We refer to and rely on observations by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs SitaldasTirathdasreported in(1961) 41 ITR 367.Hon’ble Supreme Court laying down following principal referred to various rulings that illustrated aspects of diversion of income by overriding title. “These are the cases which have considered the problem from various angles. Some of them appear to have applied the principle correctly and some, not. But we do not propose to examine the correctnes…

M/S. Veerabhadrappa Sangappa & Company, Sandur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1, Bellary

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1054/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013–14

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT
Section 145Section 28Section 5

…ld, it did not attain character of ‘income’ in the hands of assessee, and therefore cannot be taxed. B.5.1. In support of his contention, reliance was placed on following decisions: Page 53 of 138 A.Y:2013-14 i. CIT vs Sitaldas Tirathdas reported in (1961) 41 ITR 367 (SC) ii. Poona Electric supply Co. Ltd. vs CIT (1965) 57 ITR 521 (SC). iii. Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain vs CIT (1991) 190 ITR 1 (SC). iv. CIT vs Modipon Ltd., (2018) 400 ITR 1 (SC). v. CIT vs TJayavhandran (2018) 406 ITR 1(SC). vi. Pr.CIT vs Gyan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., SLP (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 17347/2019. vii. Pr.CIT vs Gyan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.,…

M/S. Ramgad Minerals & Mining Limited, Hospet vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Bellary

In the result appeal filed by assessee for A

ITA 1271/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shree Vijay Mehta, C. AFor Respondent: Shree Muzaffar Hussain, CIT DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 37(1)Section 80I

…of R & R plan, which would be deducted from sale proceeds. This was one of the conditions for resuming mining operations under Category ’B’. We refer to and rely on observations by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs Sitaldas Tirathdas reported in (1961) 41 ITR 367. Hon’ble Supreme Court laying down following principal referred to various rulings that illustrated aspects of diversion of income by overriding title. “These are the cases which have considered the problem from various angles. Some of them appear to have applied the principle correctly and some, not. But we do not propose to examine the correctne…

M/S. Ramgad Minerals and Mining Limited, Hospet vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Bellary

In the result appeal filed by assessee for A

ITA 1270/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shree Vijay Mehta, C. AFor Respondent: Shree Muzaffar Hussain, CIT DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 37(1)Section 80I

…of R & R plan, which would be deducted from sale proceeds. This was one of the conditions for resuming mining operations under Category ’B’. We refer to and rely on observations by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs Sitaldas Tirathdas reported in (1961) 41 ITR 367. Hon’ble Supreme Court laying down following principal referred to various rulings that illustrated aspects of diversion of income by overriding title. “These are the cases which have considered the problem from various angles. Some of them appear to have applied the principle correctly and some, not. But we do not propose to examine the correctne…

M/S Karnataka State Co-Operative Federation Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 866/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanyam, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh, Addl. CIT (D.R)
Section 57Section 57A

…s to be utilized as per the above rule and it should be only for specified purpose and as such it should be considered as it is diverted at source by over riding title. He relied on judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sitaldas Tirathdas 41 ITR 367 and judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Karnataka Urban Infrastructure Development and Finance Corporation (KUIDFC) 284 ITR 582; CIT Vs. Karnataka State Agricultural Produces Processing and Export Corporation Ltd. 377 ITR 496; CIT Vs. Pandavapura Sahakara Sakkare Kharkane Ltd. 198 ITR 690. He relied on the judgement of…

M/S Karnataka State Co-Operative Federation Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 865/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanyam, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh, Addl. CIT (D.R)
Section 57Section 57A

…s to be utilized as per the above rule and it should be only for specified purpose and as such it should be considered as it is diverted at source by over riding title. He relied on judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sitaldas Tirathdas 41 ITR 367 and judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Karnataka Urban Infrastructure Development and Finance Corporation (KUIDFC) 284 ITR 582; CIT Vs. Karnataka State Agricultural Produces Processing and Export Corporation Ltd. 377 ITR 496; CIT Vs. Pandavapura Sahakara Sakkare Kharkane Ltd. 198 ITR 690. He relied on the judgement of…

M/S. Karnataka State Co-Operative Federation Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 864/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanyam, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh, Addl. CIT (D.R)
Section 57Section 57A

…s to be utilized as per the above rule and it should be only for specified purpose and as such it should be considered as it is diverted at source by over riding title. He relied on judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sitaldas Tirathdas 41 ITR 367 and judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Karnataka Urban Infrastructure Development and Finance Corporation (KUIDFC) 284 ITR 582; CIT Vs. Karnataka State Agricultural Produces Processing and Export Corporation Ltd. 377 ITR 496; CIT Vs. Pandavapura Sahakara Sakkare Kharkane Ltd. 198 ITR 690. He relied on the judgement of…

M/S. G Crop Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1017/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessmentyear: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri J.K. Kamdar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 24Section 263

…ce the same shall not form part of annual letting value of property as opined by Ld. Principal CIT. In support of this proposition, the Ld. A.R. placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sital Das Tirath Das (41 ITR 367). ITA No.1017 /Bang/2019 M/s. G. Corp Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 6 of 13 10. The Ld.A.R. further submitted that the maintenance charges paid to the service provider for maintenance of rented premises could not be treated as rent taxable in the hands of the owners. In support of this proposition, he placed his reliance on the decision rendered by…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Sri. K.Srikanth, Chennai

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

ITA 1324/CHNY/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…e amount realized by way of sale so as to settle its dues. In my considered opinion, it will only be an application of income and not diversion of income by overriding charge. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas, 41 ITR 367 (SC) is relevant. It held that the true test for the application of the rule of diversion of income by overriding charge is whether the amount sought to be deducted, in truth, never reached the assesses as his income. Obligations, no doubt, are there in every case, but it is the nature of obligation that is the decisive fact. There is difference b…

Sri K.Srikanth, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

ITA 1016/CHNY/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…e amount realized by way of sale so as to settle its dues. In my considered opinion, it will only be an application of income and not diversion of income by overriding charge. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas, 41 ITR 367 (SC) is relevant. It held that the true test for the application of the rule of diversion of income by overriding charge is whether the amount sought to be deducted, in truth, never reached the assesses as his income. Obligations, no doubt, are there in every case, but it is the nature of obligation that is the decisive fact. There is difference b…

Sri K.Srikanth, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

ITA 1015/CHNY/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…e amount realized by way of sale so as to settle its dues. In my considered opinion, it will only be an application of income and not diversion of income by overriding charge. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas, 41 ITR 367 (SC) is relevant. It held that the true test for the application of the rule of diversion of income by overriding charge is whether the amount sought to be deducted, in truth, never reached the assesses as his income. Obligations, no doubt, are there in every case, but it is the nature of obligation that is the decisive fact. There is difference b…

Shri K.Srikanth, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

ITA 307/CHNY/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…e amount realized by way of sale so as to settle its dues. In my considered opinion, it will only be an application of income and not diversion of income by overriding charge. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas, 41 ITR 367 (SC) is relevant. It held that the true test for the application of the rule of diversion of income by overriding charge is whether the amount sought to be deducted, in truth, never reached the assesses as his income. Obligations, no doubt, are there in every case, but it is the nature of obligation that is the decisive fact. There is difference b…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Emaar Mgf Construction Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1735/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Emaar Mgf Construction Central Circle-2, Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1St Floor, Ece House, 28, Kg Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aabce7912K (Appellant) (Respondent) Emaar Mgf Construction Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, 1St Floor, Ece House, 28, Kg Marg, Central Circle-2, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabce7912K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri IP Bansal, advFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT, Vs. Emaar MGF Construction Central Circle-2, Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1st Floor, ECE House, 28, KG Marg, New Delhi PAN: AABCE7912K (Appellant) (Respondent) Emaar MGF Construction Pvt. Ltd, Vs. ACIT, 1st Floor, ECE House, 28, KG Marg, Central Circle-2, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AABCE7912K (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR Assessee by: Shri IP Bansal, adv Shri Vivek Bansal, Adv Shri Nitin Midha, CA Date of Hearing 20/02/2020 Date of pr…