Commissioner of Income Tax v. R.J. Wood

334 ITR 358Reported decision#14093 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 23(1)(b) of the Income Tax ActSection 24 of the Income Tax Act

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. R.J. Wood

LAILA RUSTOM JEHANGIR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAX-WARD-3(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3077/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhlaila Rustom Jehangir Vs. Income Tax Officer, 1St Floor, 41/44, International Tax- Ward Shapoorji Pallonji Centre, 3(1)(1), Air India Building Minoo Desai Marg, Colaba Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 005 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aacpj7267L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Dhrmesh Shah & Ms. Mitali Parekh Respondent By : Anil Sant Date Of Hearing 18.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08.02.2024

For Appellant: Dhrmesh Shah &For Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 23Section 24

…was basically reimbursement of expenses incurred on behalf of the tenants. In support of its contentions the ld. Counsel has referred the following judicial pronouncements: “i. Decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v R. J. Wood P. Ltd. [334 ITR 358]. ii. Decision of the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of DCIT v. Yogen D. Sanghvi [ITA No. 4776/Mum/2014] iii. Decision of the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Ms Aloo Bejan Daver v. ITO [ITA No. 2381, 2382/Mum/2010] iv. Decision of the Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Krishna N. Bhojwani v. ACIT [ITA No. 1463, 1772/Mum/2012]” On…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S Sri Krishna Drugs Ltd.,

ITTA/166/2006HC Telangana16 Nov 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 147Section 147(1)

…(Dead) By LRs. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax 1998 (232) ITR 2 (SC). It was also submitted that this proposition of law was accepted in Hope (India) Ltd. v. CIT, 238 ITR 740 (Cal.) which was followed by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v R.J. Wood 334 ITR 358. 8. The Tribunal, in its impugned order, had this to say about the re- opening of assessment pursuant to notice under Section 147: “9. As per Section 147, the AO may, subject to the provisions of Sections 148 to 153, assess or re-assess any income chargeable to tax which he has reason to believe, has escaped assessment and any other income…

TRANSMARINE CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 17 (3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 7001/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaletransmarine Corporation Acit – 17(3) बनाम/ 15, Dubash House, J.N. Mumbai. Vs. Heredia Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafft6088G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwarlFor Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(b)Section 24

…assessee has entered into the leave and license agreement with tenants and receiving the rent. The A.O dealt on the clauses and agreements entered with the tenants and are not disputed. The Ld. AR relied on the judicial decision. “1. CIT Vs. RJ Woods P. Ltd (334 ITR 358) 2. DCIT Vs. State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (ITA No. 822/Del/2010 dated 28.10.2011), Del Trib. 3. M/s. Suman Didwania Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 5805/Mum/2010, dated 15.02.2012), Mum Trib. 4. Krishna Bhojwani Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 1463/Mum/2012, dated July 3, 2017). 5. Sharmial Tagore Vs. JCIT (150 Taxman 4) Mum. Mag. ITA No.7001 /Mum/2018 M/s.…

DCIT 24(2), MUMBAI vs. YOGEN D. SANGHVI, MUMBAI

ITA 4776/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4776/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri V. VidhyadharFor Respondent: Shri K. Shivaram
Section 143(3)Section 23

…received and hence same should be allowed. e. In fact the expenses are nothing but reimbursement of the expenses incurred on behalf of the tenants of the building. f. In the recent decision of Hon’ble Delhi High court in the case of CIT Vrs. R.J. Woods P. Ltd 334 ITR 358, it has been held that the maintenance & other charges are deductible from rent while calculating the Annual Letting value of the property. g. The Ahemdabad Tribunal in case of J.B. Patel & Co. (Co-owners) Vrs DCIT (2009) 118 ITD 556 (Ahd) para 5.2 held that "What s. 22 attempts to assess is the annual value of the property consisting of any buil…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI vs. M/S. UBEROI SONS (MACHINES) LTD.

ITA-166/2006HC Delhi31 Aug 2012
Section 147Section 147(1)

…(Dead) By LRs. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax 1998 (232) ITR 2 (SC). It was also submitted that this proposition of law was accepted in Hope (India) Ltd. v. CIT, 238 ITR 740 (Cal.) which was followed by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v R.J. Wood 334 ITR 358. 8. The Tribunal, in its impugned order, had this to say about the re- opening of assessment pursuant to notice under Section 147: “9. As per Section 147, the AO may, subject to the provisions of Sections 148 to 153, assess or re-assess any income chargeable to tax which he has reason to believe, has escaped assessment and any other income…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S UBEROI SONS MACHINES LTD.

ITA - 166 / 2006HC Delhi31 Aug 2012
Section 147Section 147(1)

…(Dead) By LRs. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax 1998 (232) ITR 2 (SC). It was also submitted that this proposition of law was accepted in Hope (India) Ltd. v. CIT, 238 ITR 740 (Cal.) which was followed by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v R.J. Wood 334 ITR 358. 8. The Tribunal, in its impugned order, had this to say about the re- opening of assessment pursuant to notice under Section 147: “9. As per Section 147, the AO may, subject to the provisions of Sections 148 to 153, assess or re-assess any income chargeable to tax which he has reason to believe, has escaped assessment and any other income…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -VI vs. M/S. UBEROI SONS (MACHINES) LTD.

ITA/166/2006HC Delhi31 Aug 2012
Section 147Section 147(1)

…(Dead) By LRs. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax 1998 (232) ITR 2 (SC). It was also submitted that this proposition of law was accepted in Hope (India) Ltd. v. CIT, 238 ITR 740 (Cal.) which was followed by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v R.J. Wood 334 ITR 358. 8. The Tribunal, in its impugned order, had this to say about the re- opening of assessment pursuant to notice under Section 147: “9. As per Section 147, the AO may, subject to the provisions of Sections 148 to 153, assess or re-assess any income chargeable to tax which he has reason to believe, has escaped assessment and any other income…

Commissioner of Income Tax v. R.J. Wood (334 ITR 358) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax