Malpani Estates v. Asstt. CIT

44 Taxmann.com 242Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2014#4474 most cited
27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Also reported as

64 SOT 105

Sections most often in play

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 154Section 270ASection 271(1)(C)Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 80a(5)section 80ib(10)section 153a(1)(a)section 80asection 80isection 153a(1)section 132asection 153cundisclosed incomesearch and seizuresection 80section 153

Judgments citing Malpani Estates v. Asstt. CIT

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1279/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 270A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1279/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke Ajay Bakliwal ACIT, Vs. C 6 Vallabh Bari, Vallabh Bari, Central Circle, Kota Kota LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABZPB 7775 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Mrs. Ani…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NUMGAMBAKKAM vs. JSR INFRA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2232/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153CSection 801ASection 80I

…. CIT [2019] 414 ITR 270 (Cal) Mohta v. CIT [2019] 414 ITR 270 (Cal) - Naresh T Wadhwani v. DCIT [2015] 68 SOT 235 (Pune Naresh T Wadhwani v. DCIT [2015] 68 SOT 235 (Pune Naresh T Wadhwani v. DCIT [2015] 68 SOT 235 (Pune-Trib) - Malpani Estates v. ACIT [2014] 64 SOT 105 (Pune Malpani Estates v. ACIT [2014] 64 SOT 105 (Pune-Trib) Trib) - DCIT v. Sheth Developers (P) Ltd [2012] 25 taxmann.com 173 DCIT v. Sheth Developers (P) Ltd [2012] 25 taxmann.com 173 DCIT v. Sheth Developers (P) Ltd [2012] 25 taxmann.com 173 (Bom) - ITO v. Gajraj Constructions [2015] 70 SOT 6 ITO v. Gajraj Constructions [2015] 70 SOT 634 (Pune…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. SEW INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1717/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang, Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri K.K. ChaitanyaFor Respondent: Smt. Mamata Choudhary
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…l apply to the assessment made under section 153A. Hence, provisions of Chapter VI-A are applicable to proceedings under section 153A and in this regard, he relied upon the decision of ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Malpani Estates Vs. ACIT reported in (2014) 64 SOT 105 (Pune). Further, Explanation (i) at the end of section 153A is like Section 158BH. In the context of section 158BH, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon reported in (2010), 321 ITR 362 (SC) noted that due to the operation of this Section, all the provisions of the Act would apply except where saving is expressly made. Sec…

M R DEVELOPERS,VIRAR vs. ACIT, CC-3, THANE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 79/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Manish Sareen
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 80A(5)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM ITA Nos. 78 & 79/Mum/2023 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) M R Developers ACIT, Central Circle-3, H-001, Vishnu Prasad Complex, Thane Vs. Purushottam Parekh Marg, Virar, Palghar, Maharashtra – 401 303 PAN/GIR No. AAHFM 1074 D (Appellant) (Respondent) : Assessee by : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi Revenue by : Shri Manish Sareen Date of Hearing : 02.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28.04.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These appeals have been filed by the assessee, challenging the order…

M R DEVELOPERS,VIRAR vs. ACIT, CC-3, THANE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 78/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Manish Sareen
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 80A(5)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM ITA Nos. 78 & 79/Mum/2023 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) M R Developers ACIT, Central Circle-3, H-001, Vishnu Prasad Complex, Thane Vs. Purushottam Parekh Marg, Virar, Palghar, Maharashtra – 401 303 PAN/GIR No. AAHFM 1074 D (Appellant) (Respondent) : Assessee by : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi Revenue by : Shri Manish Sareen Date of Hearing : 02.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28.04.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: These appeals have been filed by the assessee, challenging the order…

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 512/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…Shirke Construction Technology ( P) Ltd. (2017) 246 Taxman 300 ( Bombay) ACIT V. V N Deva Doss (2013) 32 Taxmann.com 133 Naresh T Wadhwani V DCIT (2014) 68 SOT 235 ( Pune-Trib) ITO V. Gajraj Constructions (2015) 62 Taxmann.com 18 Malpani Estates V ACIT (2014) 44 Taxmann.com 242 DCIT V. Eversmile Construction Co.(P.) Ltd. [2013] 33 taxmann.com 657 (Mumbai – Trib.) 12. In the present case as the claim for deduction was enhanced by the assessee which was on account of calculation mistake as observed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his order at para 7.3 (AY 2006-07) mentioning that “The claim was enhanced to Rs. 4,97,80,842/-…

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU A. SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 511/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…Shirke Construction Technology ( P) Ltd. (2017) 246 Taxman 300 ( Bombay) ACIT V. V N Deva Doss (2013) 32 Taxmann.com 133 Naresh T Wadhwani V DCIT (2014) 68 SOT 235 ( Pune-Trib) ITO V. Gajraj Constructions (2015) 62 Taxmann.com 18 Malpani Estates V ACIT (2014) 44 Taxmann.com 242 DCIT V. Eversmile Construction Co.(P.) Ltd. [2013] 33 taxmann.com 657 (Mumbai – Trib.) 12. In the present case as the claim for deduction was enhanced by the assessee which was on account of calculation mistake as observed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his order at para 7.3 (AY 2006-07) mentioning that “The claim was enhanced to Rs. 4,97,80,842/-…

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 499/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…Shirke Construction Technology ( P) Ltd. (2017) 246 Taxman 300 ( Bombay) ACIT V. V N Deva Doss (2013) 32 Taxmann.com 133 Naresh T Wadhwani V DCIT (2014) 68 SOT 235 ( Pune-Trib) ITO V. Gajraj Constructions (2015) 62 Taxmann.com 18 Malpani Estates V ACIT (2014) 44 Taxmann.com 242 DCIT V. Eversmile Construction Co.(P.) Ltd. [2013] 33 taxmann.com 657 (Mumbai – Trib.) 12. In the present case as the claim for deduction was enhanced by the assessee which was on account of calculation mistake as observed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his order at para 7.3 (AY 2006-07) mentioning that “The claim was enhanced to Rs. 4,97,80,842/-…

SMT. ANJU SARAF,,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 498/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…Shirke Construction Technology ( P) Ltd. (2017) 246 Taxman 300 ( Bombay) ACIT V. V N Deva Doss (2013) 32 Taxmann.com 133 Naresh T Wadhwani V DCIT (2014) 68 SOT 235 ( Pune-Trib) ITO V. Gajraj Constructions (2015) 62 Taxmann.com 18 Malpani Estates V ACIT (2014) 44 Taxmann.com 242 DCIT V. Eversmile Construction Co.(P.) Ltd. [2013] 33 taxmann.com 657 (Mumbai – Trib.) 12. In the present case as the claim for deduction was enhanced by the assessee which was on account of calculation mistake as observed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his order at para 7.3 (AY 2006-07) mentioning that “The claim was enhanced to Rs. 4,97,80,842/-…

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 438/NAG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…Shirke Construction Technology ( P) Ltd. (2017) 246 Taxman 300 ( Bombay) ACIT V. V N Deva Doss (2013) 32 Taxmann.com 133 Naresh T Wadhwani V DCIT (2014) 68 SOT 235 ( Pune-Trib) ITO V. Gajraj Constructions (2015) 62 Taxmann.com 18 Malpani Estates V ACIT (2014) 44 Taxmann.com 242 DCIT V. Eversmile Construction Co.(P.) Ltd. [2013] 33 taxmann.com 657 (Mumbai – Trib.) 12. In the present case as the claim for deduction was enhanced by the assessee which was on account of calculation mistake as observed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his order at para 7.3 (AY 2006-07) mentioning that “The claim was enhanced to Rs. 4,97,80,842/-…

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SMT. ANJU SARAF, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue, cross objections of the assessee are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 436/NAG/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shrisandeepgosain & Shriarunkhodpia

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh BanthiaFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 80I

…Shirke Construction Technology ( P) Ltd. (2017) 246 Taxman 300 ( Bombay) ACIT V. V N Deva Doss (2013) 32 Taxmann.com 133 Naresh T Wadhwani V DCIT (2014) 68 SOT 235 ( Pune-Trib) ITO V. Gajraj Constructions (2015) 62 Taxmann.com 18 Malpani Estates V ACIT (2014) 44 Taxmann.com 242 DCIT V. Eversmile Construction Co.(P.) Ltd. [2013] 33 taxmann.com 657 (Mumbai – Trib.) 12. In the present case as the claim for deduction was enhanced by the assessee which was on account of calculation mistake as observed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his order at para 7.3 (AY 2006-07) mentioning that “The claim was enhanced to Rs. 4,97,80,842/-…

SHRI MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN ,GANDHIDHAM vs. THEACIT, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 93/RJT/2020[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi , A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23A

…respect to share trading business can be allowed as deduction against the escaped income as discussed above. In this 12 A.Y. 2016-17 and 4 others regard, we refer to the order of the ITAT Pune Tribunal in the case of Malpani states versus a CIT reported in 44 Taxmann.com 242 wherein it was held as under: 16. The argument set-up by the learned Departmental Representative on the basis of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. (supra), in our view, is also untenable having regard to the facts of the present case. No doubt the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed tha…

MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, , GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 97/RJT/2018[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi , A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23A

…respect to share trading business can be allowed as deduction against the escaped income as discussed above. In this 12 A.Y. 2016-17 and 4 others regard, we refer to the order of the ITAT Pune Tribunal in the case of Malpani states versus a CIT reported in 44 Taxmann.com 242 wherein it was held as under: 16. The argument set-up by the learned Departmental Representative on the basis of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. (supra), in our view, is also untenable having regard to the facts of the present case. No doubt the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed tha…

MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, , GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 96/RJT/2018[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi , A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23A

…respect to share trading business can be allowed as deduction against the escaped income as discussed above. In this 12 A.Y. 2016-17 and 4 others regard, we refer to the order of the ITAT Pune Tribunal in the case of Malpani states versus a CIT reported in 44 Taxmann.com 242 wherein it was held as under: 16. The argument set-up by the learned Departmental Representative on the basis of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. (supra), in our view, is also untenable having regard to the facts of the present case. No doubt the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed tha…

MANISH GYANCHAND JAIN,GANDHIDHAM vs. ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE, , GANDHIDHAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/RJT/2018[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi , A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23A

…respect to share trading business can be allowed as deduction against the escaped income as discussed above. In this 12 A.Y. 2016-17 and 4 others regard, we refer to the order of the ITAT Pune Tribunal in the case of Malpani states versus a CIT reported in 44 Taxmann.com 242 wherein it was held as under: 16. The argument set-up by the learned Departmental Representative on the basis of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (P.) Ltd. (supra), in our view, is also untenable having regard to the facts of the present case. No doubt the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed tha…

JUPITER CONSTRUCTIONS,VIRAR vs. ACIT CC 3 , THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 6622/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () - Assessment Year 2010-11 - Assessment Year 2011-12 - Assessment Year 2012-13

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 80Section 80A(5)Section 80I

…1 ITAs 6620, 6621 & 6622/Mum/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) - Assessment year 2010-11 - Assessment year 2011-12 - Assessment year 2012-13 Jupiter Constructions ACIT, Circle-3, Thane vs M. Baria Business House P.P. Marg, Virat Nagar Virar (W), Dist Palghar PAN : AAGFJ1999R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, AR Assessee by Shri Anand Mohan, CIT (DR) Date of hearing 17-08-2021 Date of pronouncement 12-11-2021 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey (JM): Captioned appeals by the same…

JUPITER CONSTRUCTIONS,VIRAR vs. ACIT CC-3, , THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 6620/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () - Assessment Year 2010-11 - Assessment Year 2011-12 - Assessment Year 2012-13

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 80Section 80A(5)Section 80I

…1 ITAs 6620, 6621 & 6622/Mum/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) - Assessment year 2010-11 - Assessment year 2011-12 - Assessment year 2012-13 Jupiter Constructions ACIT, Circle-3, Thane vs M. Baria Business House P.P. Marg, Virat Nagar Virar (W), Dist Palghar PAN : AAGFJ1999R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, AR Assessee by Shri Anand Mohan, CIT (DR) Date of hearing 17-08-2021 Date of pronouncement 12-11-2021 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey (JM): Captioned appeals by the same…

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SHRI MOHANLAL CHUGH, INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for the A

ITA 239/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing)

…and has to be taxed under the head ‘income from capital gains’ and not under the head ‘income from other sources’. The ld. CIT(A) also placed reliance on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Pune in the case of Malpani Estates vs. ACIT reported in 64 SOT 105 (Pune) wherein it is held that the character of income does not change because of the search. The ld. CIT(A) further noted that the provisions of section 115BBE are not applicable in the case of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Finally, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.2,08,00,000/- so made by the Assessing Offi…

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. M/S. CHUGH REALTY, INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for the A

ITA 238/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing)

…and has to be taxed under the head ‘income from capital gains’ and not under the head ‘income from other sources’. The ld. CIT(A) also placed reliance on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Pune in the case of Malpani Estates vs. ACIT reported in 64 SOT 105 (Pune) wherein it is held that the character of income does not change because of the search. The ld. CIT(A) further noted that the provisions of section 115BBE are not applicable in the case of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Finally, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.2,08,00,000/- so made by the Assessing Offi…

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. SHRI NITESH CHUGH, INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for the A

ITA 122/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing)

…and has to be taxed under the head ‘income from capital gains’ and not under the head ‘income from other sources’. The ld. CIT(A) also placed reliance on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Pune in the case of Malpani Estates vs. ACIT reported in 64 SOT 105 (Pune) wherein it is held that the character of income does not change because of the search. The ld. CIT(A) further noted that the provisions of section 115BBE are not applicable in the case of the assessee for the assessment year under consideration. Finally, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.2,08,00,000/- so made by the Assessing Offi…

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2