Dashrathbhai G Patel v. DCIT

19 SOT 183Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#23303 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2021.

Judgments citing Dashrathbhai G Patel v. DCIT

Shri Krishna Mohan Choursiya, Rajgarh vs. ITO, Rajgarh

In the result, the assessee’s appeal i

ITA 853/IND/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 68

…hi Vs ITO-3(4), Jodhpur – ITA No. 108/Jodh/2013 • Prem Bhai Kanji Bhai Tandel Vs ITO – ITA No. 192/Ahd/2016 • DCIT Vs Shri Rajendra Kumar Singhvi – ITA No. 313/Jodh/2010 • Dashrathbhai G Patel Vs DCIT – 182 ITD 327 (Ahd-Trib.) • Smt. Mina Deogun v. ITO [2008] 19 SOT 183 (Kol.) • Pfizer Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2015] 56 taxmann.com 260/ 153 ITD 433 (Mum.) • CIT v. Ashven Datla [2013] 37 taxmann.com 261/ 218 Taxman 74 (Mag.)(AP) On consideration of above, we find force in the contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that fair market value of land as on the date of diversion i.e. on 25.11.2010 shall be taken as Rs.68…

Shri Vijay Kumar, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4-1, Jaipur

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 584/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2020AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Tanuj Agarwal (Adv.)For Respondent: Miss Chanchal Meena (JCIT)

Section 147Section 148

…, it was held that in case of relinquishment of asset, period of holding of previous owner has to be considered for computation of capital gains and not the date of relinquishment. Reliance was also being placed in case of Smt. Mina Deogun Vs. ITO reported in 19 SOT 183 (2008) wherein Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal held as under :- • The date of succession will be immaterial in such cases for the purposes of determination of the cost of acquisition in the hands of the successor. • Indexation is to be allowed in respect of holding of the asset and not in relation to the individuality of the assessee. • Period of ho…

Income Tax Officer (It)-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Karl Jimmy Daruwalla, Mumbai

ITA 5507/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Sh. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5507/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar SinghFor Respondent: Shri Firoze B. Andhyarijine

Section 48Section 49

…t. Further, the appellant has also relied upon various other judgments to support their claim, which are: • Asstt. DIT v. Rajeev Ajmani [IT Appeal No. 2057 of 2011] (Delhi). • Kamal Mishra v. ITO [2008] 19 SOT 251 (Delhi). • Smt. Mina Deogun v. ITO [2008] 19 SOT 183 (KoL). 10 I.T.A. No. 5507/Mum/2017 Shri Karl Jimmy Daruwalla, • Mrs. Pushpa Sofat v. ITO [2002] 81ITD1 (Chd.)(SMC). • Dy. CIT v. Smt. Meera Khera [2004] 2 SOT 902 (Mum.). • Asstt. CIT v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. [IT Appeal No. 2672 of 2006] (Mum.). • Arun Shungloo Trust v. CIT [2012] 18 taxmann.com 261 However, the AO has rejected the claim o…