Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd. v. ITO (393 ITR 644)

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. AMARDEEP CONSTRUCTIONS, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 3202/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri. Anikesh Banerjeedcit, Central Circle -1(3), Mumbai Amardeep Constructions Room No. 903, 9Th Floor, Pratishtha 7/08, Patidar Complex, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai Kannamwar Nagar No. 2, Near 400020 Vikas High School Vikhroli East, Mumbai 400083 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaufa3513A (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्ााररतीकीओरसे/ Assessee By: Shri. J.P. Bairagra& Ms. Rupa Nanda /Revenue By: Shri. Surendra Mohan (Sr. Dr)

For Appellant: Shri. J.P. Bairagra& Ms. Rupa NandaFor Respondent: Shri. Surendra Mohan (SR. DR)

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

…he project. Thus, all TDS amounts since AY 2017 have been accumulated and remain unclaimed amount to Rs. 3.38 crore.The Ld. AR respectfully relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer 393 ITR 644, wherein it has been held that Tribunal was not right in law in rejecting project completion method which was followed consistently by assessee and instead applying work-in-progress method and taxing 80 per cent thereon as net profit. 11. Regarding the statement recorded under section 131 during survey 133A of the Act, the Ld. AR respectfully re…

LODHA FOUNDATION, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 12/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR, Ld. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “B”, JAIPUR BEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 PAN No.: AABCK 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent ACIT, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/s. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 PAN No.: AABCK7751L ...... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. & Mr. Hemang Gargieya, Adv., Ld. ARs Respondent by : Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-D…

LODHA FOUNDATION, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 11/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR, Ld. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “B”, JAIPUR BEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 PAN No.: AABCK 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent ACIT, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/s. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 PAN No.: AABCK7751L ...... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. & Mr. Hemang Gargieya, Adv., Ld. ARs Respondent by : Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-D…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. KAIZEN ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 390/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR, Ld. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “B”, JAIPUR BEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 PAN No.: AABCK 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent ACIT, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/s. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 PAN No.: AABCK7751L ...... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. & Mr. Hemang Gargieya, Adv., Ld. ARs Respondent by : Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-D…

KAIZEN ENTREPRISES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ACIT-DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 156/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR, Ld. DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “B”, JAIPUR BEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 PAN No.: AABCK 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent ACIT, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/s. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 PAN No.: AABCK7751L ...... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. & Mr. Hemang Gargieya, Adv., Ld. ARs Respondent by : Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-D…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), PUNE, PUNE vs. G K WONDERS, PUNE

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 25/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Pune24 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None/Ex-parteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43C

…y Rule without any change in law and facts, the method consistently adopted by the assessee cannot be changed. Reliance is placed upon the following judgements 1. Decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644. 2. Decision of ITAT- Mumbai in the case of Prem Enterprises ITO reported in (2012) 25 3. Decision of High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Principal Officer, Hill view Infrastructure reported in (2016) 384 ITR 451- Follows CIT Vs. Bilahari Investment (P) Ltd. reported in (2008) 299 ITR 1 (SC) 4. Decision of ITAT-Mumbai in the cas…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD., PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 5067/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: PendingITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

…method/completed contract method for the treatment of advances received from proposed buyers through developer JSM DPL. In the light of the above fact we observe that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 (Guj,) adjudicating similar issue i.e. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the project completion method which was followed consistently by the assessee and instead applying work in progress method and taxing 80 per cent. Thereon as net profit? held that "as assessee has followed…

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD,PUNE vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 1155/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

…method/completed contract method for the treatment of advances received from proposed buyers through developer JSM DPL. In the light of the above fact we observe that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 (Guj,) adjudicating similar issue i.e. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the project completion method which was followed consistently by the assessee and instead applying work in progress method and taxing 80 per cent. Thereon as net profit? held that "as assessee has followed…

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for the AY 2005-06 in I

ITA 109/PUN/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Ajay VohraFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali

…method/completed contract method for the treatment of advances received from proposed buyers through developer JSM DPL. In the light of the above fact we observe that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 (Guj,) adjudicating similar issue i.e. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the project completion method which was followed consistently by the assessee and instead applying work in progress method and taxing 80 per cent. Thereon as net profit? held that "as assessee has followed…

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 109/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 250

…method/completed contract method for the treatment of advances received from proposed buyers through developer JSM DPL. In the light of the above fact we observe that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 (Guj,) adjudicating similar issue i.e. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the project completion method which was followed consistently by the assessee and instead applying work in progress method and taxing 80 per cent. Thereon as net profit? held that "as assessee has followed…

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 108/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 250

…method/completed contract method for the treatment of advances received from proposed buyers through developer JSM DPL. In the light of the above fact we observe that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 (Guj,) adjudicating similar issue i.e. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the project completion method which was followed consistently by the assessee and instead applying work in progress method and taxing 80 per cent. Thereon as net profit? held that "as assessee has followed…

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 107/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 250

…method/completed contract method for the treatment of advances received from proposed buyers through developer JSM DPL. In the light of the above fact we observe that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 (Guj,) adjudicating similar issue i.e. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the project completion method which was followed consistently by the assessee and instead applying work in progress method and taxing 80 per cent. Thereon as net profit? held that "as assessee has followed…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 544/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…method/completed contract method for the treatment of advances received from proposed buyers through developer JSM DPL. In the light of the above fact we observe that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 (Guj,) adjudicating similar issue i.e. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the project completion method which was followed consistently by the assessee and instead applying work in progress method and taxing 80 per cent. Thereon as net profit? held that "as assessee has followed…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 543/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…method/completed contract method for the treatment of advances received from proposed buyers through developer JSM DPL. In the light of the above fact we observe that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 (Guj,) adjudicating similar issue i.e. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the project completion method which was followed consistently by the assessee and instead applying work in progress method and taxing 80 per cent. Thereon as net profit? held that "as assessee has followed…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the COs filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H. Nagin Khincha &For Respondent: Shri M. Mathivanan, D.R

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 45(2)

…method/completed contract method for the treatment of advances received from proposed buyers through developer JSM DPL. In the light of the above fact we observe that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 (Guj,) adjudicating similar issue i.e. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in rejecting the project completion method which was followed consistently by the assessee and instead applying work in progress method and taxing 80 per cent. Thereon as net profit? held that "as assessee has followed…

HI-TECH ESTATES & PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 391/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri B.D.Ojha , ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT, DR

Section 143(3)Section 263

…utiny assessment proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2013-14 and subsequent assessment year 2015-16. 18. Ld A.R. has placed reliance on the following judgments/orders of Hon’ble High Courts and Tribunal: (i) Manjusha Estates (P) ltd vs CIT, 393 ITR 644 (Guj) (ii) CIT vs. Principal Officer, Hill View Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.,384 ITR 451 (P&H) (iii) Paras Buildtech India (P) Ltd vs CIT, 382 ITR 630 (Del) (iv) Ashoka Hi-tech Builders Pvt Ltd vs DCIT, (ITA Nos.121/Ind/2016 & 686/Ind/2016) A.Y. 12-13 & 13-14 dated 3.8.2018 (v) Bhoomi Construction Projects vs ACIT, 7 NYP TTJ 1472 (Mum) (vi) Hawar…

DARSHANAM LIFE SPACE PVT. LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1662/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1590/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 D.C.I.T, M/S.Darshanam Life Space Pvt. Circle-1(1)(1), Ltd. Vs. 1St Floor, 3Rd Floor, Platinium Complex, Aaykar Bhavan, Race Course Subhanpura, Circle, Vadodara-390007. Opp. Ganga Jamna Hospital, Vadodara-390023. Pan: Aadcd2030M

For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.R

…. - Investment Ltd. vs. CIT 77 ITR 533 (SC) - CIT vs. Krishna Swami Mudaliar 53 ITR 122 (SC) - CIT vs. Advance Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. 275 ITR 30 (Guj.) b) Project Completion / Unit Sale Method is a recognized method. - Manjusha Estates Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 393 ITR 644 (Guj.) - CIT vs. Hill View Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 384 ITR 451 (P&H) - Manish Buildwell P. Ltd. 204 Taxman 106 (Del.) - CIT vs. Bilahari Investment Pvt. Ltd. 299 ITR 1(SC) - CIT vs. Hyundai Heavy Industry Co. Ltd. 291 ITR 482 Further reliance is also placed on the following: - CIT vs. Happy Home Corporation – 94 taxmann.com 292 (Gujarat) - CIT…

M/S ASHOKA HI-TECH BUILDERS P. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE

In the result Ground No.1 and 2 of the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 686/IND/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ompletion method has been considered to be recognized method and if consistently followed, the AO is bound to assess the income of the assessee on that basis. a) Decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd Vs ITO reported in (2017) 393 ITR 644 . b) Decision of ITAT- Mumbai in the case of Prem Enterprises Vs. ITO reported in (2012) 25 Taxmann.com 179 (Mumbai) c) Decision of High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Principal Officer, Hill view Infrastructure reported in (2016) 384 ITR 451- Follows CIT Vs. Bilahari Investment (P) Ltd. reported in (2008) 299 ITR 1 (SC) Asho…

Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd. v. ITO

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Manjusha Estates (P) Ltd. v. ITO

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. AMARDEEP CONSTRUCTIONS, MUMBAI

LODHA FOUNDATION, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

LODHA FOUNDATION, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. KAIZEN ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., KOTA

KAIZEN ENTREPRISES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ACIT-DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), PUNE, PUNE vs. G K WONDERS, PUNE

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD., PUNE

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD,PUNE vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

SAHARA INDIA POWER CORPORATION LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-2(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI MATHIKERE RAMAIAH SEETHARAM, BANGALORE

HI-TECH ESTATES & PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

DARSHANAM LIFE SPACE PVT. LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

M/S ASHOKA HI-TECH BUILDERS P. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE