DCIT v. Ranjit Vithaldas

23 Taxmann.com 226Reported decision2012#23786 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 23(2)Section 23(4)Section 250Section 45Section 54Section 54(1)Section 54E

Judgments citing DCIT v. Ranjit Vithaldas

Sanjeev Behl, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Int Tax Ward, 1(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5345/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri K GopalFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar G Subramanyam, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)Section 250Section 56Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.5345/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) Sanjeev Behl, B-2003, Treon Tower, Bhakti Park, Near I-Max Theater, Wadala, Mumbai - 400031 PAN: ACGPB2129M Appellant v/s ITO (IT), Ward-1(2)(1) Mittal Court, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Respondent Assessee by : Shri K Gopal Shri Akhilesh Deshmukh Revenue by : Shri Vijaykumar G Subramanyam, Sr.DR Date of Hearing – 19/02/2025 Date of Order - 30/04/2025 ORDER PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The assessee has filed the pres…

Cheryl Oscar Pereira, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 13(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 1013/MUM/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt (SR. DR.)
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54Section 54(1)Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 1013/Mum/2024 (Assessment year: 2015-16) Cheryl Oscar Pereira vs Deputy Commissioner of Income A G/1, Dheeraj Heritage Tax, Circle-13(1)(2), Mumbai Residency, Link Road Extn, Shastrina, Santacruz West, Mumbai-400 054 PAN : AADPC2481N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Madhur Agarwal Respondent by : Shri H.M. Bhatt (SR. DR.) Date of hearing : 11/06/2024 Date of pronouncement : 18/ 06/2024 O R D E R PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M: Instant appeal of the asses…

Pramod Sharma, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 35(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stood dismissed

ITA 6440/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal/For Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

…ion of Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court , the investment in two different flats at separate locations as were made by the assessee should be allowed. Further our attention was drawn to the decision of Mumbai-tribunal in the case of DCIT v. Ranjit Vithaldas (2012) 23 Taxmann.com 226(Mum). The Ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the decision of the Special Bench of the Mumbai-tribunal in Sushila M Jhaveri(supra) has categorically held that investment can be made in one residential house property and deduction should be allowed restricted to one residential house property provided other conditions are fulfilled. T…

DCIT v. Ranjit Vithaldas (23 Taxmann.com 226) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax