Damodaraswamy Naidu v. ACIT

59 ITD 510Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1997#21220 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2017.

Judgments citing Damodaraswamy Naidu v. ACIT

SRI. C. SHANKAR REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1492/BANG/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Mar 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri Narayana Murthy, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR-I)
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 1490 to 1492/Bang/2015 Assessment years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 Shri C. Shankar Reddy, Advocate, The Deputy Commissioner of Income No. 16, Behind Kapali Tax, Talkies, Central Circle -1(1), Vs. 6th Main Road, Gandhinagar, No. 324, Central Revenue Building, Bangalore. Queens Road, Bangalore – 560 001. PAN: ADFPR 7952L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narayana Murthy, CA Respondent by : Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR-I) Date of hearing : 09.02.2017 Date of Pronounce…

SRI. C. SHANKAR REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1491/BANG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Mar 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri Narayana Murthy, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR-I)
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 1490 to 1492/Bang/2015 Assessment years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 Shri C. Shankar Reddy, Advocate, The Deputy Commissioner of Income No. 16, Behind Kapali Tax, Talkies, Central Circle -1(1), Vs. 6th Main Road, Gandhinagar, No. 324, Central Revenue Building, Bangalore. Queens Road, Bangalore – 560 001. PAN: ADFPR 7952L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narayana Murthy, CA Respondent by : Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR-I) Date of hearing : 09.02.2017 Date of Pronounce…

SRI. C. SHANKAR REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1490/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri Narayana Murthy, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR-I)
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 1490 to 1492/Bang/2015 Assessment years : 2011-12 to 2013-14 Shri C. Shankar Reddy, Advocate, The Deputy Commissioner of Income No. 16, Behind Kapali Tax, Talkies, Central Circle -1(1), Vs. 6th Main Road, Gandhinagar, No. 324, Central Revenue Building, Bangalore. Queens Road, Bangalore – 560 001. PAN: ADFPR 7952L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narayana Murthy, CA Respondent by : Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR-I) Date of hearing : 09.02.2017 Date of Pronounce…

PRAFULLA KUMAR GHOSH,MALDA vs. ITO,WARD-2, MALDA, MALDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 686/KOL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Sept 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year : 2006-07 (Appellant ) (Respondent) Prafulla Kumar Ghosh -Versus- I.T.O., Ward-2, Malda Malda (Pan:Adhpg 8048 C) For The Appellant : Shri K.M.Roy, Fca For The Respondent : Shri S.S.Alam, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2015. Order Per Shri M.Balaganesh, Am 1. This Appeal Of The Assessee Arises Out Of The Order Of The Learned Cita In Appeal No. 279/Mld/Cit(A)/Jal/08-09 Dated 02.03.2012 For The Asst Year 2006-07 Arising Out Of The Order Of The Learned Assessing Officer Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri K.M.Roy, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S.S.Alam, JCIT
Section 133(6)Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 69B

…was a substantial difference between CPWD rates and State PWD rates, matter was to be remitted back to Assessing Officer for working out cost of construction by taking State PWD rates - Held, yes [Para 4] [Matter remanded]” K Damodarswamy Naidu vs ACIT (1997) 59 ITD 510 (Mad) – “Under section 16A when a reference is made to the Valuation Officer, the Valuation Officer values the property after giving notice to the assessee and giving opportunity to 4 Prafulla Kumar Ghosh A.Yr.2006-07 file any objection on behalf of the assessee. Nowhere in the Act or in the Rules it has been prescribed that only the CPWD rates…

Damodaraswamy Naidu v. ACIT (59 ITD 510) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax