Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dr. D.A. Irani

234 ITR 850High Court1998#15386 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 344,197 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2021.

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dr. D.A. Irani

Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dimapur, Dimapur vs. M/S. Parsuram Sanwarmal Agarwalla & Sons, Dimapur

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 143/GTY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151

…er was upheld by the Karnataka High Court. The said decision is clearly distinguishable and is not applicable in the instant case. Similarly, reliance by the department on the decision of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dr. D.A. Irani, 234 ITR 850 is also misplaced and is clearly distinguishable, in as much as in the instant case, the petitioner continued to remain in possession of the property and only improved his title, when it converted its lease hold rights into free hold rights. For the reasons stated aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the notices issued under Section 148 of the…

Income Tax Officerm Ward-Dimapur, Dimapur vs. Shri Bhama Agarwalla, Dimapur

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 142/GTY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151

…er was upheld by the Karnataka High Court. The said decision is clearly distinguishable and is not applicable in the instant case. Similarly, reliance by the department on the decision of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dr. D.A. Irani, 234 ITR 850 is also misplaced and is clearly distinguishable, in as much as in the instant case, the petitioner continued to remain in possession of the property and only improved his title, when it converted its lease hold rights into free hold rights. For the reasons stated aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the notices issued under Section 148 of the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Dimapur, Dimapur vs. Shri Sanwarmall Agarwalla, Dimapur

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 141/GTY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151

…er was upheld by the Karnataka High Court. The said decision is clearly distinguishable and is not applicable in the instant case. Similarly, reliance by the department on the decision of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dr. D.A. Irani, 234 ITR 850 is also misplaced and is clearly distinguishable, in as much as in the instant case, the petitioner continued to remain in possession of the property and only improved his title, when it converted its lease hold rights into free hold rights. For the reasons stated aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the notices issued under Section 148 of the…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dimapur, Dimapur vs. Shri Ankit Agarwalla, Dimapur

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 140/GTY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151

…er was upheld by the Karnataka High Court. The said decision is clearly distinguishable and is not applicable in the instant case. Similarly, reliance by the department on the decision of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dr. D.A. Irani, 234 ITR 850 is also misplaced and is clearly distinguishable, in as much as in the instant case, the petitioner continued to remain in possession of the property and only improved his title, when it converted its lease hold rights into free hold rights. For the reasons stated aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the notices issued under Section 148 of the…

Kamal Kishore Singhi, Mumbai vs. ACIT 26(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 813/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Kamal Kishore Singhi Asstt. Commissioner Of 10/161, Kamal Park Income Tax-26(1) K.G. Vs. Building, V.S. Marg, Mahim, Mittal Hospital Bldg., Mumbai-400016. 6Th Floor, Charni Road (W), Mumbai-400002 Pan No. Aadps3820K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Hari S. Raheja, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Hari S. Raheja, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 54

…order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the Ld. CIT(A), relying on the order of the ITAT ‘B’ Bench Mumbai in the case of Jaimal K. Shah, Mumbai v. Department of Income Tax in ITA No. 6966/Mum/2010 and CIT v. Dr. Irani 234 ITR 850 (Bom), upheld the decision of the AO treating the holding period as short term and since the capital gain arising is short term, held that the assessee is not entitled to exemption u/s 54 of the Act. 5. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee files a Paper Book (P/B) containing (i) Computation of Total Income for Assessment year 2011- 12, (ii)…

Tina Kapoor, Mumbai vs. ITO 26(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5663/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Ms. Tina Kapoor Ito-26(2)(1) Flat No. 4, Sanghi House, 94, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. Nepean Sea Road, Road Mumbai-400006 Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aelpk9444F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Nitesh Joshi, Ar Revenue By : Mr. V. Justin, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/11/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/02/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Mr. V. Justin, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 54

…CIT(A) and relies on the order of the Tribunal in ITO v. Shri Sushil Kumar Aggarwal (ITA No. 5720/Mum/2010)- ITAT Mumbai, ACIT v. Shri Jaimal K. Shah (ITA No. 6966/Mum/2010)-ITAT Mumbai and the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Dr. D.A. Irani (1998) 234 ITR 850 (Bom). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our decisions are given below. There are two aspects in the instant case. The 1st one is whether it is case of STCG or LTCG. The 2nd issue is whether the appellant constructed one residential house property in India within three years after…

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dr. D.A. Irani (234 ITR 850) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax