CIT vs Sardarmal Kothari 302 ITR 286, Kishore H. Galaiya v. ITO137 ITD 229, Hasmukh G. Gala vs Income Tax Officer

125 DTR 299Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2015#22261 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2018.

Judgments citing CIT vs Sardarmal Kothari 302 ITR 286, Kishore H. Galaiya v. ITO137 ITD 229, Hasmukh G. Gala vs Income Tax Officer

ITO 16(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Shashanka Ghosh, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6751/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-16(1)(4), Vs Shri Shashanka Ghosh, Room No.438, 4Th Floor, C-701, Jay Bharat Chs Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Off. Yari Road,Near Amarnath M. K. Road, Tower, Varsova Andher (West), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400061 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Acwpg5915E

Section 54

…for the assessee, defended the impugned order by claiming that the impugned issue is covered by the decision from Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT vs Sardarmal Kothari 302 ITR 286, Kishore H. Galaiya vs ITO137 ITD 229, Hasmukh G. Gala vs Income Tax Officer 125 DTR 299(Mum.) and CIT vs Ram Gopal 372 and 498 (Del.). Our attention was invited to the copy of allotment letter (pages 1 to 11 of the paper book) and copy of the registered agreement of sale (pages 12 to 135 of the paper book). 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that…

DCIT 32(2), Mumbai vs. Poonam Anil Dalmia, Mumbai

ITA 3471/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrig. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3471/Mum/2016, (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Ishwar P. RathiFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRIG. S. PANNU, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3471/Mum/2016, (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) DCIT - 32(2) Poonam Anil Dalmia, R. No. 308, 3rd floor, C-11, बिधम/ B-41/206, Yogi Nagar, PratyakshkarBhavan, BKC Saraswati CHS, Eksar Vs. Bandra, Mumbai-51. Rd, Borivali(W), Mumbai-14 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN/GIR No. AABPD6802G (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Ishwar P. Rathi प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Suman Kumar सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01/01/2018 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीता…

ACIT 32(2), Mumbai vs. Kiran G. Gadhia, Mumbai

ITA 4021/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kochar: (A.Y : 2010-11) Acit 30(2) Vs. Shri Kiran G Gadhia Pratyakshkar Bhavan Flat No.305 / 306 R.No.202, 2Nd Floor 3Rd Floor, Sanjay Apartment Bkc, Bandra (E) B Wing, Mandapeshwar Road Mumbai – 400 051 Borivali (W) Mumbai – 400 092 Pan : Aabpg8511D (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S S Bist प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से Respondent By : Shri Haridas Bhat सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06/03/2017 घोषणा की तारीख Date Of Pronouncement : 22/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N.Prasad (J.M.) : This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-44, Mumbai Dated 18.03.2015 For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3).

For Appellant: Shri S S BistFor Respondent: Shri Haridas Bhat

Section 143(3)Section 48Section 50Section 54Section 54F

…the builder is to be considered and not necessarily the date of sale agreement or sale deed. 1. Vinod Kumar Jain v. CIT 46 [DTR 187 (P&H)] 2. CIT Vs. Panchand Gandhi [200 CTR 473 (Guj)] 3. CIT Vs. Anilaben Upendra Shah [184 CTR 129] 4. Hasmukh G Gala Vs. ITO [125 DTR 299 Mumbai Tribunal] The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee further submits that Delhi High Court in the case of Gulshan Malik, it was a conditional allotment in the sense that as per the allotment letter issued by the builder subject to entering into agreement and signing the agreement no right to provisional / final allotment accrues to the purchaser. He…