Commissioner of Income Tax v. Smt. Beena K. Jain

ITO (International Taxation) - 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Sunil Shiv Khanna, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

…he Act. The assessee in defense of his argument relied on the following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Smt. Beena K. Jain [1996] 217 ITR 363 (Bom) 2. Bastimal K. Jain vs. ITO in ITA No.2896/M/2014 for A.Y. 2010-11 order dated 08.06.2016 3. V.M. Dujodwala vs. ITO 1991 36 ITD 130 Mum The Ld. A.R. finally submitted that in view of the ratio laid down by the jurisdictional High Court and the co-ordinate benches of the Tribunal the appeal of the Revenue deserved to be dismissed. 8. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the material on record including the decisions cited by the Ld. A.R. The und…

Ramita Mahendra Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon'Ble & Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble

…sessee only on 11.09.2009 and that date should be reckoned for the purpose of computation of claim of deduction u/s. 54F of the Act. We find that the learned counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of V M Dujodwala vs. ITO 36 ITD 130 (Mum), wherein the Hon’ble Tribunal considered the facts of the case as under: 7 ITA.No.4535/MUM/2014 (A.Y: 2010-11) Ramita Mahendra Mehta “He submitted that the builder being out of fund and for such other reason, went on delaying the construction. Just to help the builder to fasten the construction, the payments were made in instalments much ea…

Nitin Radheshyam Agarwal, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 21(2)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhnitin Radheshyam Agarwal, Acit -21(2), Royal I Estate, Unit No.B-34, Room No. 115, First Floor, 4Th Floor, Naigaon Cross Road, Vs. Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Wadala, Mumbai-400031. Mumbai-400012. Pan: Aacpa5030G (Appellant) (Respondent)

…for occupation and obtained the possession. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee ITA No. 1399/M/2017- Nitin Radheshyam Agarwal relied upon the decision of CIT vs. Smt. Beena K. Jain 217 ITR 363 (Bom. High Court), V.M. Dujodwala vs. ITO 36 ITD 130 (Bom.), Purushootam Govind Bhatt vs. FITO 13 ITD 393 (Bom.), Bastimal K. Jain vs. ITO (ITA No. 2896/M/2014 dated 08.06.2016), Sandeep N. Panchamia vs. ITO (ITA No. 5281/M/2013 dated 17.12.2014), Sunil Datwani vs. ITO (ITA No. 1775/M/2008 dated 22.09.2010), ITO vs. Zebun A. Rangawala (ITA No. 2090/M/2013 dated 21.11.2014) & ITO vs. Sri. Rajiv Bhola…

Farid Sabuwala, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 20(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is allowed and that of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…Reliance was placed on following judicial pronouncements:- (i) CIT Vs. Beena K.Jain [Bombay High Court 75 Taxman 145 (Bom)] (ii) Bastimal K.Jain Vs ITO [Mumbai Tribunal ITA No. 2896/Mum/2014 order dated 08/06/2016] (iii) V.M.Dujodwala Vs.ITO (Mumbai Tribunal 36 ITD 130) 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused relevant material available on record including the cited case laws. The basic facts are not in dispute. The only dispute to be settled before us is whether the assessee could claim deduction u/s 54 merely by obtaining the possession within the prescribed time period of one year before the date o…

Pankaj Khandelwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)(1), Mumbai

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई "ायपीठ ‘सी ’ मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी आर. सी. शमा", लेखा सद", एवं "ी अमरजीत िसंह, "ाियक सद", के सम" BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.148/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बनाम/ Shri Pankaj Khandelwal Income Tax Officer 8(2)(1) C/o. INI Consulting Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai Vs. B-202, Universal Business Park, Off Saki Vihar Road, Chandivali Mumbai - 400057 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AHYPK4370L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee by: Dr.K.Shivram & Shri Rahul K. Hakani D…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Vembu Vaidyanathan, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Shri Vembu Vaidyanathan, Circle-3(1), B-1602, Beaumonde बनाम/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Apartments, Appa Saheb Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400028 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaipv5796J Shri B. Yadagiri-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Vijay C. Kothari

…essee is entitled for deduction, because it is as per the period for prescribed u/s 54F of the Act. The case of the assessee further find support from the decision of the Tribunal in V.M. Dujodwala vs ITO 13 Vembu Vaidyanathan (ITA No.4554/Mum/1986): (1991) 036 ITD 130 (Mumbai Tribunal.), which is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:- 2. The assessee is an individual and for the assessment year 1981-82. the relevant previous year ends on Diwali 1980. The assessee was the joint owner of Flat No. 26 in Meghdoot, Marine Drive, Bombay, purchased in 1952 for Rs. 38,000. He sold the said flat for Rs. 4,50,000 as…

ITO WD 3(4), Thane vs. Uday Kashinath Sathe, Thane

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Shri Uday Kashinath Sathe, Ward-3(4), 403,404, Happy Valley Phase बनाम/ Room No.9, B-Wing, Vi, Manpada, Vs. 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Nr. Tikujiniwadi, Wagle Estate, Thane-400604 Thane(W)-400604 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Adups7623L

…rdingly. This disposes of ground No. 1, 2 & 3 set, out in the Revised Grounds of Appeal.” 2.2. We are also reproducing hereunder, another decision of the Tribunal which is on identical fact in the case of V.M. Dujodwala vs ITO (ITA No.4554/Mum/1986): (1991) 036 ITD 130 (Mumbai Tribunal.):- 13 Uday Kashinath Sathe 2. The assessee is an individual and for the assessment year 1981-82. the relevant previous year ends on Diwali 1980. The assessee was the joint owner of Flat No. 26 in Meghdoot, Marine Drive, Bombay, purchased in 1952 for Rs. 38,000. He sold the said flat for Rs. 4,50,000 as per agreement dated 12-5-8…