DCIT v. Mahindra Holiday and Resorts (Ind) Ltd.

ACIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. STERLING HOLIDAY RESORTS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Smt. Renu Jauhristerling Holiday Resorts Ltd Vs. Dcit – Circle 2(3)(1) 236, 4Th Floor, Purva Room No. 552, 5Th Primus, Okkiyampettai, Old Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mahabalipuram Road, Mk Road, New Marine Thoraipakkam, Chennai, Lines, Mumbai – 400 Tamil Nadu – 600 097. 020 Pan/Gir No. Aabct7079G (Applicant) (Respondent) Acit – Circle 2(3)(1) Vs. Sterling Holiday Resorts Room No. 552, 5Th Floor, Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, Mk 236, 4Th Floor, Purva Road, New Marine Lines, Primus, Okkiyampettai, Mumbai – 400 020 Old Mahabalipuram Road, Thoraipakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 097. Pan/Gir No. Aabct7079G (Applicant) (Respondent)

…in its own case for A.Y 2011-12 to 2013-14 in ITA No. 4611 to 4613/Mum/2018. 17. Apart from above, assessee also placed reliance on other decisions of Coordinate Special Bench of Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Mahindra Holiday and Resorts (Ind) Ltd, [2010] 39 SOT 438 (Chennai-Trib) 18. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied on the orders of the revenue authority. 19. We have heard the counsels for both the parties, perused the material placed on record, judgemnets cited before us and orders passed by the revenue authorities. From the records, we found that the identical issue has already been decided by the Coordina…

STERLING HOLIDAY RESORTS LIMITED,TAMIL NADU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Smt. Renu Jauhristerling Holiday Resorts Ltd Vs. Dcit – Circle 2(3)(1) 236, 4Th Floor, Purva Room No. 552, 5Th Primus, Okkiyampettai, Old Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mahabalipuram Road, Mk Road, New Marine Thoraipakkam, Chennai, Lines, Mumbai – 400 Tamil Nadu – 600 097. 020 Pan/Gir No. Aabct7079G (Applicant) (Respondent) Acit – Circle 2(3)(1) Vs. Sterling Holiday Resorts Room No. 552, 5Th Floor, Ltd Aayakar Bhavan, Mk 236, 4Th Floor, Purva Road, New Marine Lines, Primus, Okkiyampettai, Mumbai – 400 020 Old Mahabalipuram Road, Thoraipakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 097. Pan/Gir No. Aabct7079G (Applicant) (Respondent)

…in its own case for A.Y 2011-12 to 2013-14 in ITA No. 4611 to 4613/Mum/2018. 17. Apart from above, assessee also placed reliance on other decisions of Coordinate Special Bench of Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Mahindra Holiday and Resorts (Ind) Ltd, [2010] 39 SOT 438 (Chennai-Trib) 18. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied on the orders of the revenue authority. 19. We have heard the counsels for both the parties, perused the material placed on record, judgemnets cited before us and orders passed by the revenue authorities. From the records, we found that the identical issue has already been decided by the Coordina…

RELIGARE TECHNOVA GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri N. K. Pradhan, Am

…t in the above assessment years. Reliance was placed by him on the decision in the case of Xerox India Ltd. vs. DCIT (2015) 55 taxmann.com 29 (Delhi-Trib.); Dr. Aman Khera vs. DCIT (2012)138 ITD 443; ACIT vs. Mahindra Holidays and Resorts (India) Ltd. (2010) 39 SOT 438 (Chennai (SB); CIT vs. Dinesh Kumar Goyal (2011) 331 ITR 10 (Del); DCIT vs. TVS Electronics Ltd. (2012) 52 SOT 287 (Chennai); CIT vs. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. (2010) 326 ITR 526 (Bom); CIT vs. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. (1992) 193 ITR 349 (Bom). The ld. counsel thus submits that the order of the ld. CIT(A) upholding the addition of unearned income…

ACIT 9(1), MUMBAI vs. AAKASH LAVLESH LEISURE P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

…eated as income in the very first year as the assessee is mandated to provide services to members for the entire tenure of 25 years. The assessee relied upon decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra Holidays and Resorts Limited (2010) 39 SOT 438(Chennai)(SB) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment v.CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802(SC) to submit that advance membership fee be spread over 25 years and only 1/25 portion be brought to tax during the impugned assessment year. It was observed by the learned CIT(A) that from perusal of the facts of the case and…

ACIT 9(1), MUMBAI vs. AAKASH LAVLESH LEISURE P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

…eated as income in the very first year as the assessee is mandated to provide services to members for the entire tenure of 25 years. The assessee relied upon decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra Holidays and Resorts Limited (2010) 39 SOT 438(Chennai)(SB) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment v.CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802(SC) to submit that advance membership fee be spread over 25 years and only 1/25 portion be brought to tax during the impugned assessment year. It was observed by the learned CIT(A) that from perusal of the facts of the case and…

ACIT 9(1), MUMBAI vs. AAKASH LAVLESH LEISURE P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

…eated as income in the very first year as the assessee is mandated to provide services to members for the entire tenure of 25 years. The assessee relied upon decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra Holidays and Resorts Limited (2010) 39 SOT 438(Chennai)(SB) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment v.CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802(SC) to submit that advance membership fee be spread over 25 years and only 1/25 portion be brought to tax during the impugned assessment year. It was observed by the learned CIT(A) that from perusal of the facts of the case and…

ADDL CIT 9(1), MUMBAI vs. AAKASH LAVLESH LEISURE P.LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

…eated as income in the very first year as the assessee is mandated to provide services to members for the entire tenure of 25 years. The assessee relied upon decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra Holidays and Resorts Limited (2010) 39 SOT 438(Chennai)(SB) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment v.CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802(SC) to submit that advance membership fee be spread over 25 years and only 1/25 portion be brought to tax during the impugned assessment year. It was observed by the learned CIT(A) that from perusal of the facts of the case and…

ITO 9(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AAKASH LAVLESH LEISURE (P) LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

…eated as income in the very first year as the assessee is mandated to provide services to members for the entire tenure of 25 years. The assessee relied upon decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra Holidays and Resorts Limited (2010) 39 SOT 438(Chennai)(SB) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment v.CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802(SC) to submit that advance membership fee be spread over 25 years and only 1/25 portion be brought to tax during the impugned assessment year. It was observed by the learned CIT(A) that from perusal of the facts of the case and…

AAKASH LAVLESH LEISURE P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(1)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

…eated as income in the very first year as the assessee is mandated to provide services to members for the entire tenure of 25 years. The assessee relied upon decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra Holidays and Resorts Limited (2010) 39 SOT 438(Chennai)(SB) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment v.CIT (1997) 225 ITR 802(SC) to submit that advance membership fee be spread over 25 years and only 1/25 portion be brought to tax during the impugned assessment year. It was observed by the learned CIT(A) that from perusal of the facts of the case and…