ITO v. Ms. Susheela M Javeri

14 SOT 394Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2007#22495 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 357,073 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2019.

Judgments citing ITO v. Ms. Susheela M Javeri

Asst CIT 14(1), Mumbai vs. Arpita S. Bajla, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 6098/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

Section 133(6)

…d are a single residential unit. On perusal of the order of the Jurisdiction High Court in CIT v. Raman Kumar Suri [2013] 255 CTR 107 and the Special Bench of the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT in ITO-19(3)-4, Mumbai v Ms. Sushila M. Jhaveri [2007] 292 ITR (AT) 1/[2007] 14 SOT 394 (Mum.) (SB) held that entering into two separate agreements is no ground to hold them as two separate residential houses and disallowing the benefit of section 54F. I find that 11 Ms. Arpita S. Bajla the view of the assessee is further supported by decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in CIT vs. Ananda Basappa reported in [2009] 309 ITR 3…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Prakash Electric Company

ITA/884/2007HC Karnataka23 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 47Section 47A

…to be satisfied for the five years from the date of succession. Section 47A(3) has not satisfied that non-compliance to clause – (d) will be applicable for invoking the provisions. The Special Bench in the case of ITO Vs. Ms. Susheela M Javeri, 2007 14 SOT 394 had an occasion to consider the meaning of the word ‘a’ and ‘any’ as appearing in section 54 and 54F of the Act. It will be relevant to reproduce the following extract from that order. Date of Order: 23-07-2018. ITA No.884/2007 c/w ITA No.60/2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax…

Kids Clinic India Private Limited

COP/60/2015HC Karnataka21 Aug 2015

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

Section 260Section 47Section 47A

…to be satisfied for the five years from the date of succession. Section 47A(3) has not satisfied that non-compliance to clause – (d) will be applicable for invoking the provisions. The Special Bench in the case of ITO Vs. Ms. Susheela M Javeri, 2007 14 SOT 394 had an occasion to consider the meaning of the word ‘a’ and ‘any’ as appearing in section 54 and 54F of the Act. It will be relevant to reproduce the following extract from that order. Date of Order: 23-07-2018. ITA No.884/2007 c/w ITA No.60/2015 The Commissioner of Income Tax…

ITO v. Ms. Susheela M Javeri (14 SOT 394) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax