DCIT v. Brigade Enterprises

24 DTR 371Reported decision#24007 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Judgments citing DCIT v. Brigade Enterprises

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. M/S. LIFE STYLE INFRATECH PVT. LTD., INDORE

ITA 291/IND/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर"यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Virtual Hearing) IT(SS)A Nos.27, 28, 29 and ITA No. 291/Ind/2016 Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2013-14 A.C.I.T., M/s. Lifestyle Infratech Central-2, Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Indore Patwari Halka No.17, Near DPS School, Vs. Nipania, Indore (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) PAN: AAJCS8613H Assessee by Shri Prakash Jain and Shreya Jain, C.A.& Ars Revenue by Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR Date of Hearing 14.03.2023 Date…

SOHAM CONSTRUCTION,KALYAN vs. ITO WD 2(4), KALYAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 336/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Narendra Singh Janpangi
Section 80I

…er dated 11.05.2011. ii) Bengal Ambuja Housing Development Ltd. v DCIT in ITA.No. 1595/Kol/2005 A.Y.2003-04 order dated 24.03.2006. iii) CIT v. Shree Balaji Developers in ITA.No.2592/Mum/2006 A.Y.2004-05 order dated 21.10.2008. iv) DCIT v Brigade Enterprises [24 DTR 371 (Bang)]. v) Arun Excello Foundations P. Ltd v. ACIT [108 TTTJ 71] (Chennai). vi) Saroj Sales Corporation in ITA.No. 4008/Mum/2007 order dated 24.01.2008. 7 ITA.No.336/MUM/2016 (A.Y: 2012-13) ITA.No.164/MUM/2016 (A.Y: 2012-13) M/s. Soham Construction 9. Since the Ld.CIT(A) has granted only proportionate deduction as against full deduction claimed u…

ITO WD 2(4), KALYAN vs. SOHAM CONSTUCTION, BADLAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 164/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Narendra Singh Janpangi
Section 80I

…er dated 11.05.2011. ii) Bengal Ambuja Housing Development Ltd. v DCIT in ITA.No. 1595/Kol/2005 A.Y.2003-04 order dated 24.03.2006. iii) CIT v. Shree Balaji Developers in ITA.No.2592/Mum/2006 A.Y.2004-05 order dated 21.10.2008. iv) DCIT v Brigade Enterprises [24 DTR 371 (Bang)]. v) Arun Excello Foundations P. Ltd v. ACIT [108 TTTJ 71] (Chennai). vi) Saroj Sales Corporation in ITA.No. 4008/Mum/2007 order dated 24.01.2008. 7 ITA.No.336/MUM/2016 (A.Y: 2012-13) ITA.No.164/MUM/2016 (A.Y: 2012-13) M/s. Soham Construction 9. Since the Ld.CIT(A) has granted only proportionate deduction as against full deduction claimed u…

DCIT v. Brigade Enterprises (24 DTR 371) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax