Development Corpn Ltd Vs CIT 259 ITR 51(SC) 4. Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT (227 ITR 414)

Maharashtra Housing & Area Develpoment Authority, Mumbai vs. CIT(Exemption)-Circle 2, Mumbai

In the result, both these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 39/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT DR

…rations which are tasked with development of industrial areas, by statute, the judgments of this court, in Shri Ramtanu Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra [(1970) 3 SCC 323.] and Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation v. CIT [(1997) 227 ITR 414 (SC); ITA Nos. 39/Mum/2024 & 4571/Mum/2023 Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority; A.Ys. 09-10 & 17-18 (1997) 7 SCC 17.] have declared that these bodies are involved in ‘development’ and are not essentially engaged in trading. In Shri Ramtanu Co-operative Housing Society [Shri Ramtanu Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. State of Mahara…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Vijay M. Mistry Construction Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1481/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2938/Ahd/2011, 2939/Ahd/2011, 2286/Ahd/2012, 268/Ahd/2015, 269/Ahd/2015, 502/Ahd/2017, 1145/Ahd/2019 & 1468/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17) Address In A.Ys. 2007-08, बनाम/ 2008-09 & 2009-10 Vs. Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax Circle–8, B-209, 2Nd Floor, 501, Swagat, C. G. Road, Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad – & Bhavan, Ambawadi, 380006 (Gujarat) Ahmedabad Address In A.Ys. 2010-11 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Range-8, B-209, 2Nd Floor, Ltd. Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar “Mistry House”, 9, Preyas Bhavan, Ambawadi, Society, Opp. Gulbai Ahmedabad Tekra Police Choki & Ambawadi, Ahmedabad – 380015 Address In A.Ys. 2011-12 Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax (Osd) & Circle–8, B-209, 2Nd Floor, “Mistry House”, 9, Preyas Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar Society, Opp. Gulbai Bhavan, Ambawadi, Tekra Police Choki, Ahmedabad Ambawadi, Ahmedabad –

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2938/Ahd/2011, 2939/Ahd/2011, 2286/Ahd/2012, 268/Ahd/2015, 269/Ahd/2015, 502/Ahd/2017, 1145/Ahd/2019 & 1468/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17) Address in A.Ys. 2007-08, बनाम/ 2008-09 & 2009-10 Vs. Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Asst. Commissioner of Ltd. Income Tax Circle–8, B-209, 2nd Floor, 501, Swagat, C. G. Road, Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad – & Bhavan…

Vijay M.Mistry Construction Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., Circle-8, Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed and Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2938/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Dec 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2938/Ahd/2011, 2939/Ahd/2011, 2286/Ahd/2012, 268/Ahd/2015, 269/Ahd/2015, 502/Ahd/2017, 1145/Ahd/2019 & 1468/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17) Address In A.Ys. 2007-08, बनाम/ 2008-09 & 2009-10 Vs. Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax Circle–8, B-209, 2Nd Floor, 501, Swagat, C. G. Road, Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad – & Bhavan, Ambawadi, 380006 (Gujarat) Ahmedabad Address In A.Ys. 2010-11 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Range-8, B-209, 2Nd Floor, Ltd. Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar “Mistry House”, 9, Preyas Bhavan, Ambawadi, Society, Opp. Gulbai Ahmedabad Tekra Police Choki & Ambawadi, Ahmedabad – 380015 Address In A.Ys. 2011-12 Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income Tax (Osd) & Circle–8, B-209, 2Nd Floor, “Mistry House”, 9, Preyas Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar Society, Opp. Gulbai Bhavan, Ambawadi, Tekra Police Choki, Ahmedabad Ambawadi, Ahmedabad –

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2938/Ahd/2011, 2939/Ahd/2011, 2286/Ahd/2012, 268/Ahd/2015, 269/Ahd/2015, 502/Ahd/2017, 1145/Ahd/2019 & 1468/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2016-17) Address in A.Ys. 2007-08, बनाम/ 2008-09 & 2009-10 Vs. Vijay M. Mistry Cons. P. Asst. Commissioner of Ltd. Income Tax Circle–8, B-209, 2nd Floor, 501, Swagat, C. G. Road, Panjara Pole, Pratyakshkar Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad – & Bhavan…

The ACIT, Patan Circle, Patan vs. Visnagar Taluka Majoor Sahakari Mandli Ltd, Visnagar

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1530/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. DR

Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

….1529 & 1530/Ahd/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2013-14 Page 3 of 4 prayed that the disallowance of deduction was rightly done by the Assessing Officer. Ld. DR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Limited (227 ITR 414). 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of State Bank of India (SBI) vs.CIT, 389 ITR 578 clearly held that in case of Society engaged in providing credit facilities to its members, it is only interest derived from credit provided to its members which is deductible under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Th…

The ACIT, Patan Circle, Patan vs. Visnagar Taluka Majoor Sahakari Mandali Ltd, Visnagar

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1529/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri H.V. Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. DR

Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

….1529 & 1530/Ahd/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2013-14 Page 3 of 4 prayed that the disallowance of deduction was rightly done by the Assessing Officer. Ld. DR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Limited (227 ITR 414). 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of State Bank of India (SBI) vs.CIT, 389 ITR 578 clearly held that in case of Society engaged in providing credit facilities to its members, it is only interest derived from credit provided to its members which is deductible under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act. Th…

Naya Raipur Development Authority, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Raipur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 63/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 174 & 63/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year(S) : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Naya Raipur Development Authority Prayavas Bhawan, North Block, Sector 19, Naya Raipur Marg, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar(C.G.) Pin-492 002. Pan : Aaalc0225H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : S/Shri S.R Rao & Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ar’S. Revenue By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09.06.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022

For Appellant: S/shri S.R Rao & Rajesh KumarFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 64Section 65Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 174 & 63/RPR/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year(s) : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Naya Raipur Development Authority Prayavas Bhawan, North Block, Sector 19, Naya Raipur Marg, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar(C.G.) Pin-492 002. PAN : AAALC0225H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : S/shri S.R Rao & Rajesh Kumar Chawda, A…

Naya Raipur Development Authority, Raipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Raipur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 174/RPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 174 & 63/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year(S) : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Naya Raipur Development Authority Prayavas Bhawan, North Block, Sector 19, Naya Raipur Marg, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar(C.G.) Pin-492 002. Pan : Aaalc0225H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : S/Shri S.R Rao & Rajesh Kumar Chawda, Ar’S. Revenue By : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 09.06.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022

For Appellant: S/shri S.R Rao & Rajesh KumarFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 64Section 65Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 174 & 63/RPR/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year(s) : 2012-13 & 2013-14 Naya Raipur Development Authority Prayavas Bhawan, North Block, Sector 19, Naya Raipur Marg, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar(C.G.) Pin-492 002. PAN : AAALC0225H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : S/shri S.R Rao & Rajesh Kumar Chawda, A…

M/S. Sagar Projects, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2, Baroda

Appeals of the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 801Section 801B(10)Section 80ASection 80I

…on'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Radhe Developers Vs. /TO 113 ITJ 300 (AHD) in Para 30 & 31 is worth referring. The Honble ITAT has referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gu/arat Industrial Development Corporation Vs. CIT 227 ITR 414 and for the sake of ready reference is reproduced as under: "30. What is the meaning of the term develop, developer, developing, development, we can find the answer in certain dictionaries, including the Law Dictionary. (a) The Webster's Encyclopedia Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language gives following meanings of the term 'developer’ as…

Gujarat Urban Development Co. Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. ITO, Ward-4, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed…’’

ITA 634/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, CIT/D.R

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271Section 80I

…ourt in the case of CIT vs. ABG Heavy Industries Ltd. 322 ITR 323 is not on the issue of whether the activity of the concern is of the nature of a works contact. The decision of honorable Supreme Court in the case of Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation 227 ITR 414 is also not applicable as in that case the question was not whether the appellant was doing the activities in its own right or as a nodal agency as in the present case. Similarly, the facts and question are distinguishable in other cases cited by the appellant. The appellant is held not eligible for deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) and the decision…

Gujarat Urban Development Co. Ltd. (Gudc), Gandhinagar vs. The Dy. CIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed…’’

ITA 1910/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms Madhumita Royअपील सं./Ita No.1910/Ahd/2017 & "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2013-2014 Gujarat Urban Development Co. Ltd., D.C.I.T, 6Th Block, 5Th Floor, Gandhinagar Circle, Vs. Gandhinagar. “Udyog Bhavan” Sector 11 Gandhinagar 382011. Pan: Aabcg 1330R

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar &

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…ourt in the case of CIT vs. ABG Heavy Industries Ltd. 322 ITR 323 is not on the issue of whether the activity of the concern is of the nature of a works contact. The decision of honorable Supreme Court in the case of Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation 227 ITR 414 is also not applicable as in that case the question was not whether the appellant was doing the activities in its own right or as a nodal agency as in the present case. Similarly, the facts and question are distinguishable in other cases cited by the appellant. The appellant is held not eligible for deduction claimed u/s.80IA(4) and the decision…

Dy C.I.T..1(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. M/S Raipur Development Authority, Raipur (Cg)

Accordingly, we uphold the order of the First Appellate Authority. Appeal dismissed

ITA 212/BIL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Ram Lal Negi)

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Mishra, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Chabra,C.A

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 38(2)

…ether the activities of the assessee constitutes carrying on of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business to come within the purview of the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Act. 12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of the assessee GIDC in 227 ITR 414 had the occasion to consider the objects of the GIDC qua the claim of exemption u/s. 10(20A) of the Act. The relevant observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reads as under:- 7. The Division Bench of the High Court while agreeing that 'industrial activity is one of the facets of general development' adopted a reasoning that since development of…