Kishore H. Galaiya v. ITO

MARGI JOY DESI ,MUMBAI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

…nefit of section 54 to the assessee. The AO in this regard placed reliance on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mrs. Hilla J.B. Wadia (216 ITR 376) and the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of Kishore H. Galaiya Vs. ITO (137 ITD 229). 4. Aggrieved assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance made by the AO and held that “7.7 In the instant case the appellant was also well aware of the fact that the date of possession of the flat towards which the deduction u/s. 54 is claimed, was not within the 3 years period from the date of the sale…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-24(1), MUMBAI vs. BHAVESH SURENDRA SHAH, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.998/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2018-19) Acit-24(1) बिधम/ Bhavesh Surendra Shah Room No.601, Piramal 34/P, Laxmi Industrial Vs. Chambers, Jeejeebhoy Estate, New Link Road, Lane, Lalbaug, Parel, Andheri-W, Mumbai- Mumbai-400012. 400058. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaeps0265M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Mr. Dalpat Shah Revenue By: Mr. Chetan Kacha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 12.03.2022 For Ay. 2018-19. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Revenue Reads As Under: - “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Allowing Deduction U/S 54(1) Of Rs.2,29,33,659/- Of The I. T. Act, 1961. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Is Eligible For Deduction U/S 54(1) Of The I. T. Act, 1961 Provided The Assessee Invests In A New Capital Asset Within A Period Of One Year Before Or Two Years After The Date Transfer Of Old House, The Taxpayer Should Acquire Another Residential House Or Should Construct A Residential House Within A Period Of Three Years From The Date Of Transfer Of The Old House.

…cisions was brought to our notice: (i) CIT v Mrs. Hilla J B Wadia 69 Taxman 114 (Bom) 7 A.Y. 2018-19 Bhavesh Surendra Shah (ii) Mustnsir I Tehsildar v ITO 168 ITD 523 (Mum) (iii) CIT v Smt. Sundar Kaur Sujan Singh 3 SOT 206 (Mum) (iv) Kishor H Galaiya v ITO 137 ITD 229 (Mum) Thus, we note that in this case, the condition provided u/s 54 (1) regarding construction of a new house that it should be completed within three years from date of transfer of old house, have been fulfilled; and further we note that there is no bar provided for disallowance of cost of construction paid prior to one year from the date of sa…

ACIT 22 (3), MUMBAI vs. VINAY GIRISH BAJPAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) I.T.A. No.7676/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Vs. Vinay Girish Bajpai ACIT-22(3) 305, 3rd Floor B-09, Punjab CHS Piramal Chambers, Tagore Road Lal Baug, Parel Santacruz(W) Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 054 PAN : AABPB5914D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Satyaprakash Singh Department by S.N.Kabra Date of Hearing 17.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement 01.02.2022 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appea…

RAJAN GUNBA TELANG,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT - 21 , MUMBAI

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…e following decisions:– i) CIT v/s Rajesh Kumar Jalan, [2006] 286 ITR 274 (Gau.); 6 Rajan Gumba Telang ii) Fathima Bai v/s ITO, [2009] 32 DTR (Kar.) 243 (Kar.); iii) CIT v/s Jagriti Aggarwal, [2011] 339 ITR 610 (P&H); iv) Kishore H. Galaiya v/s ITO, [2012] 137 ITD 229 (Mum.); v) Bina Indrakumar v/s ITO, [2012] 137 ITD 238 (Mum.); vi) Gajendra Kumar T. Agarwal v/s ITO, [2011] 11 ITR (Trib.) 640 (Mum.); vii) Anil Kumar Omkar Singh Aurora v/s ITO, ITA no.4648/ Mum./2013, dated 06.11.2013; and viii) Humayun Suleman Merchant v/s CIT, [2016] 387 ITR 421 (Bom.). 4. The learned Authorised Representative submitted, si…

MADHU HASMUKH MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-19(2)(NOW ASSESSED BY CIT-30, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stand

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Amarjit Singh & Assessment Year-2015-16

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI Before Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member and Shri Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member and Assessment Year-2015-16 Madhu Hasmukh Mehta, ACIT-19(2)(now assessed by 101, Manokamna Bldg. CIT-30), बनाम/ Chembur East, 207, Matru Mandir, Tardeo Vs. Mumbai-400071 Road, Grant Road (West), Mumbai-400007 PAN No.AFTPM4284L ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Pratik H. Mehta Shri S. K. Mishra राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 06/05/2019 13/05/2019 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date of Order: आदेश / O R D E…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-25(3)(5), MUMBAI vs. NILIMA ABHIJIT TANNU, MUMBAI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunatha, Am

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5923/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14) ITO – 25(3)(5), Nilima Abhijit Tannu, R. No. 609, C-10, 6th floor, 002, Ground floor, बिधम/ Pratykshkar Bhavan, Bandra Sunder Apartment, Vs. Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Ajamal Road, Vile Parle Mumbai-400 051 (east), Mumbai-400 057. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN/GIR No. AFBPT0182L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : C.O. No. 333/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Nilima Abhijit Tannu,…

ACIT, CIR.- 17(1), MUMBAI vs. ABHAY RAMESH KUMAR AGARWAL, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE, SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT Circle-17(2) Shri Abhay Ramesh Kumar Room No. 117, 1st Floor, Agarwal, Flat No.15, Vijaymahal Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. D Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAAPA7909A Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Rajiv Gubgutra (DR) Respondent by : Shri Rajen Damani (DR) Date of Hearing : 28.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 28.08.2018 ORDERUNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by Revenue under Section 253 of…

ITO WARD - 1(3), THANE, THANE vs. KALPANA PRADEEP AMBRE, THANE

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Smt. Kalpana Pradeep Ward-1(3), Ambre, बनाम/ Room No.10, 6Th Floor, 1801, Pristine Vasant Lawns, Vs. Ashar It Park, B-Wing, Pokhran Road No.2, Wagle Indl. Estate, Majiwada, Thane(W)-400604 Thane(W) (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aafpc0868D

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘एच’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “H”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथ, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri JOGINDER SINGH, Judicial Member, and Shri G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Smt. Kalpana Pradeep Ward-1(3), Ambre, बनाम/ Room No.10, 6th Floor, 1801, Pristine Vasant Lawns, Vs. Ashar IT Park, B-Wing, Pokhran Road No.2, Wagle Indl. Estate, Majiwada, Thane(W)-400604 Thane(W) (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.AAFPC0868D Shri Ram Tiwari-DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by "नधा"…

ASST CIT 34(2), MUMBAI vs. MANISH VASAVADA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Asst. Commissioner Of Shri Manish Vasavada Income Tax-34(2), Room Vs. 1604, Premium Tower, No. 205, 2Nd Floor, C-12, Lokhandwala Complex, Bkc, Bandra (E), Mumbai- Andheri (W), 400050. Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aacpv9012F Appellant Respondent

…dependent of the date on which the assessee actually filed the return of income. The assessee had instead invested after the due date u/s 139(1) but before the belated return filed u/s 139(4). The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision in Kishore H. Galaiya v. ITO 137 ITD 229, Jagriti Aggarwal (supra), CIT v. Rajesh Kumar Jalan (2006) 286 ITR 274 (Gau.), Anilkumar Omkar Singh (supra), and held that the intent of time limit allowed u/s 54(2) to be that u/s 139(4) instead of section 139(1). As the assessee in the instant case had invested in new property before filing of return of income on 26.03.2014 u/s 139(4), the Ld…

ABHAY R. AGGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 17(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Mr. Abhay R. Aggarwal, The Commissioner Of Flat No.15, Vijay Mahal, Income Tax (Appeals)-28, D Road, Vs. Mumbai Churchgate, Mumbai- 400 020 Pan: Aaapa7909A (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Rajen J. Damani, A.R. Revenue By : Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2018 O R D E R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mr. Abhay R. Aggarwal, The Commissioner of Flat No.15, Vijay Mahal, Income Tax (Appeals)-28, D Road, Vs. Mumbai Churchgate, Mumbai- 400 020 PAN: AAAPA7909A (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Rajen J. Damani, A.R. Revenue by : Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen, D.R. Date of Hearing : 01.01.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 24.01.2018 O R D E R Per D.T. GARASIA, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against…

FARHAN MAKKI PETTIWALA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 24(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainshri Farhan Makki Pettiwala Assistant Commissioner B-102, Bianca, Panch Marg Of Income Tax - 24(1) 402, Yari Road, Next To Ashoka Vs. Mumbai Towers, Andheri (W) Mumbai 400061 Pan - Aacpp2204P Appellant Respondent

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member and Shri Sandeep Gosain, Judicial Member Shri Farhan Makki Pettiwala Assistant Commissioner B-102, Bianca, Panch Marg of Income Tax - 24(1) 402, Yari Road, Next to Ashoka Vs. Mumbai Towers, Andheri (W) Mumbai 400061 PAN - AACPP2204P Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Naresh Kumar Respondent by: Shri M.V. Rajguru Date of Hearing: 11.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 17.08.2016 O R D E R Per Jason P. Boaz, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)- 34, Mumbai dated 06.08.201…

SUMAN KADAM,THANE vs. ITO WD 2(4), THANE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2777/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Suman Kadam Ito, Ward 2(4), बनाम/ Vardaan, 6Th Floor, S/1, Narmada Apartment, Cabin Cross Road, Bhayandar (E), Ashar I. T. Park, Road No. 16-Z, Vs. Thane-401 105 Wagle Indl. Estate, Thane-400 604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Afipk 3600 D (Assessee) (Revenue) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3256/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Ito, Ward 2(2), Suman Kadam Thane-400 604 Thane-401 105 Vs. (Revenue) : (Assessee) : Shri Vijay Shah Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Debabrata Baidya सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 12.5.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 08.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Arising Out Of The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Thane (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 27.2.2014, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09 Vide Order Dated 31.12.2010. 2

…05 lacs), i.e., the last date for filing the return of income u/s. 139(4) for the current year, was taken into account for the purpose. Reliance toward the same was placed on CIT vs. Jagriti Aggarwal [2011] 339 ITR 610 (P&H); Kishore H. Galaiya vs. ITO [2012] 137 ITD 229 (Mum); and Jagtar Singh Chawla vs. Asst. CIT (in ITA No. 4923/Del/2010 dated 30.6.2011), since affirmed in CIT vs. Jagtar Singh Chawla (in ITA No. 71 of 2012 dated 20.3.2013/copy on record). The proportionate capital gain, at 87.35%, applied, with reference to which exemption u/s. 54F is to be allowed, worked to Rs.39.25 lacs, to which extent rel…