Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT

131 ITR 435Supreme Court of India1981#1794 most cited

What is Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT authority for?

For buildings subject to local house tax, the standard rent determined by the local authority for house tax purposes is deemed the Annual Letting Value (ALV) of the property for income tax under the Income-tax Act, 1961.

64

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT · Shiela Kaushish · annual letting value · ALV · Section 23 · Section 23(1) · standard rent · local authority house tax · determination of annual value · Income from House Property · self occupied property

Also reported as

7 Taxmann 1

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

self occupied propertysection 80lsection 23(2)annual letting valuesection 23(1)section 2(31)interest on interestannual valuesection 116section 24(a)section 22section 2(22)(e)

Judgments citing Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT

ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 544/DEL/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 24

…the Assessee ignoring the self occupied portion is not correct. 9. Coming to the valuation of the property i.e. ALV, we find merit in the submission of the assessee. In the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Sheela Kaushish vs. CIT (131 ITR 435) and also Deewan Daulat Rai Kapoor vs. NMBC & Another (122 ITR 700), it was held that in the case of building which is subjected to levy of house tax by the local authorities, standard rent determined by the local authority to levy house tax would be the standard rent and would be considered as annual letting value (ALV) of the property. It is…

ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 543/DEL/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 24

…the Assessee ignoring the self occupied portion is not correct. 9. Coming to the valuation of the property i.e. ALV, we find merit in the submission of the assessee. In the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Sheela Kaushish vs. CIT (131 ITR 435) and also Deewan Daulat Rai Kapoor vs. NMBC & Another (122 ITR 700), it was held that in the case of building which is subjected to levy of house tax by the local authorities, standard rent determined by the local authority to levy house tax would be the standard rent and would be considered as annual letting value (ALV) of the property. It is…

ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 542/DEL/2024[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 24

…the Assessee ignoring the self occupied portion is not correct. 9. Coming to the valuation of the property i.e. ALV, we find merit in the submission of the assessee. In the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Sheela Kaushish vs. CIT (131 ITR 435) and also Deewan Daulat Rai Kapoor vs. NMBC & Another (122 ITR 700), it was held that in the case of building which is subjected to levy of house tax by the local authorities, standard rent determined by the local authority to levy house tax would be the standard rent and would be considered as annual letting value (ALV) of the property. It is…

ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 541/DEL/2024[AY 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 24

…the Assessee ignoring the self occupied portion is not correct. 9. Coming to the valuation of the property i.e. ALV, we find merit in the submission of the assessee. In the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Sheela Kaushish vs. CIT (131 ITR 435) and also Deewan Daulat Rai Kapoor vs. NMBC & Another (122 ITR 700), it was held that in the case of building which is subjected to levy of house tax by the local authorities, standard rent determined by the local authority to levy house tax would be the standard rent and would be considered as annual letting value (ALV) of the property. It is…

ASHA BURMAN,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 46(1), NEW DLEHI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 540/DEL/2024[AY 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.539 To 544/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2012-13 To 2017-18 बनाम Asha Burman Acit, 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Vs. Circle 46(1), 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. Drum Shape Building, Ito, Pan No.Aaepb0966C New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 24

…the Assessee ignoring the self occupied portion is not correct. 9. Coming to the valuation of the property i.e. ALV, we find merit in the submission of the assessee. In the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Sheela Kaushish vs. CIT (131 ITR 435) and also Deewan Daulat Rai Kapoor vs. NMBC & Another (122 ITR 700), it was held that in the case of building which is subjected to levy of house tax by the local authorities, standard rent determined by the local authority to levy house tax would be the standard rent and would be considered as annual letting value (ALV) of the property. It is…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2776/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…ith actual rent and notional advantage in the form of notional interest on interest free security deposit could not be taken into consideration. …… 14. In fact, this is the view taken even by the Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 435/7 Taxman 1 on account of similarity of the provisions under the municipal enactments and section 23 of the Act. 15. It is on this basis that in the present case, the CIT(A) gave primacy to the rateable value of the property fixed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide its assessment order dated 31-12-1996 and on this basis, opined that the ac…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2775/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…ith actual rent and notional advantage in the form of notional interest on interest free security deposit could not be taken into consideration. …… 14. In fact, this is the view taken even by the Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 435/7 Taxman 1 on account of similarity of the provisions under the municipal enactments and section 23 of the Act. 15. It is on this basis that in the present case, the CIT(A) gave primacy to the rateable value of the property fixed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide its assessment order dated 31-12-1996 and on this basis, opined that the ac…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2774/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…ith actual rent and notional advantage in the form of notional interest on interest free security deposit could not be taken into consideration. …… 14. In fact, this is the view taken even by the Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 435/7 Taxman 1 on account of similarity of the provisions under the municipal enactments and section 23 of the Act. 15. It is on this basis that in the present case, the CIT(A) gave primacy to the rateable value of the property fixed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide its assessment order dated 31-12-1996 and on this basis, opined that the ac…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2773/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…ith actual rent and notional advantage in the form of notional interest on interest free security deposit could not be taken into consideration. …… 14. In fact, this is the view taken even by the Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 435/7 Taxman 1 on account of similarity of the provisions under the municipal enactments and section 23 of the Act. 15. It is on this basis that in the present case, the CIT(A) gave primacy to the rateable value of the property fixed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide its assessment order dated 31-12-1996 and on this basis, opined that the ac…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2772/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…ith actual rent and notional advantage in the form of notional interest on interest free security deposit could not be taken into consideration. …… 14. In fact, this is the view taken even by the Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 435/7 Taxman 1 on account of similarity of the provisions under the municipal enactments and section 23 of the Act. 15. It is on this basis that in the present case, the CIT(A) gave primacy to the rateable value of the property fixed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide its assessment order dated 31-12-1996 and on this basis, opined that the ac…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTER CIRCLE-4, DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2771/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…ith actual rent and notional advantage in the form of notional interest on interest free security deposit could not be taken into consideration. …… 14. In fact, this is the view taken even by the Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 435/7 Taxman 1 on account of similarity of the provisions under the municipal enactments and section 23 of the Act. 15. It is on this basis that in the present case, the CIT(A) gave primacy to the rateable value of the property fixed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide its assessment order dated 31-12-1996 and on this basis, opined that the ac…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2770/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…ith actual rent and notional advantage in the form of notional interest on interest free security deposit could not be taken into consideration. …… 14. In fact, this is the view taken even by the Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Shiela Kaushish v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 435/7 Taxman 1 on account of similarity of the provisions under the municipal enactments and section 23 of the Act. 15. It is on this basis that in the present case, the CIT(A) gave primacy to the rateable value of the property fixed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide its assessment order dated 31-12-1996 and on this basis, opined that the ac…

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)-EXEMPTION, NEW DELHI vs. HAMDARD LABORATORIES (INDIA) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1311/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri T James Singson, CIT, DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(2)Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250

…rent of this property was below Rs. 4,000 per month which was the rent being paid by the company. In view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of Dewan 11 Daulat Rai Kapoor v NDMC [1980] 122 ITR 700, Mrs Sheila Kaushish v CIT [1981] 131 ITR 435, and Amolak Ram Khosla v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 589 since in the instant case the rent payable by the company to the assessee was considered to be more than the standard rent assessable under the Delhi Rent Control Act it was not permissible to say that the rent charged by the assessee was inadequate and was intended to confer any benefit on the set…

KRISHNA BUILD HOME PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 143/JPR/2021[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Mar 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: The Learned Ao, The Reassessment Proceeding Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Without Jurisdiction & Is Based On Wrong Facts & On Change Of Opinion & In Gross Violation Of Proviso To S. 147 Of The It Act, Which Says No Action Can Be Taken M/S. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Ms Runi Pal (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 23Section 23(5)Section 24

…udicial precedents on this issue wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a series of decisions has held that the standard rent of the property is a relevant criteria and basis for determination of the annual letting value. In case of Mrs. Sheela Kaushik vs. CIT, 131 ITR 435 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that for determination of annual value standard rent should be the basis and the annual rent received by the landlord is not relevant. Further, in case of Deewan Daulat Rai Kapoor vs. NDMC, 122 ITR 700 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has again while deciding the issue of computation of rateable value of th…

KRISHNA BUILD HOME PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HOLDING CHARGE OF ITO WARD 4(2)), JAIPUR

ITA 142/JPR/2021[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Mar 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: The Learned Ao, The Reassessment Proceeding Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Without Jurisdiction & Is Based On Wrong Facts & On Change Of Opinion & In Gross Violation Of Proviso To S. 147 Of The It Act, Which Says No Action Can Be Taken M/S. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Ms Runi Pal (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 23Section 23(5)Section 24

…udicial precedents on this issue wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a series of decisions has held that the standard rent of the property is a relevant criteria and basis for determination of the annual letting value. In case of Mrs. Sheela Kaushik vs. CIT, 131 ITR 435 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that for determination of annual value standard rent should be the basis and the annual rent received by the landlord is not relevant. Further, in case of Deewan Daulat Rai Kapoor vs. NDMC, 122 ITR 700 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has again while deciding the issue of computation of rateable value of th…

MLL LOGISTICS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 164/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Hon’Ble) & Shri Saktijit Dey (Hon’Ble)

Section 115JSection 133(6)

…unt of so- called notional interest on the deposit made by the tenant, since there is no provision to this effect in s. 22 or 23 of the IT Act, 1961." In fact, this is the view taken even by the Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Shiela Kaushish Vs. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 435 on account of similarity of the provisions under the municipal enactments and Section 23 of the Act. It is on this basis that in the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gave primacy to the rateable value of the property fixed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide its assessment order dated December 31, 1996 and on this bas…

M/S FATEH HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO WARD-1(4), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 53/CHANDI/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Oct 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT
Section 22Section 23

…tled law that the annual value of a property cannot exceed its standard rent as under rent control law where applicable, laid down by the apex court in the case of Daulatrai vs New Delhi Municipal Committee 122 ITR 700 (SC) and Sheila Kaushik vs CIT (1981)131 ITR 435(SC). And by virtue of clause (1)(b) to section 23, only if actual rent exceeds fair rent/standard rent, it shall be treated as annual value of property. A.Y. 2013-14 Page 10 of 12 12. Therefore there is no dispute with the proposition that for the purposes of determining the annual value of a property in terms of section 23 of the Act, the re…

JUBILIANT ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 3 (2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 6578/MUM/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6578/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Jubiliant Enterprises Pvt. बिधम/ Acit-3(2)(1) Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. 11-B, Mittal Tower, B-Wing, 400020. Free Press Journal Marg, Mumbai-400021. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6048/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Acit-3(2)(1) बिधम/ Jubiliant Enterprises Pvt. Room No.674, 6Th Floor, Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 11-B, Mittal Tower, B- Road, Mumbai-400020. Wing, Free Press Journal Marg, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcj4688D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By: Shri Sunil Deshpande (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/04/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/06/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee As Well As Revenue Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 18.07.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -08, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2006-07. Ita Nos. 6578/M/2019 6048/M/2019 A.Y.2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)

…al value fixed by the municipal authorities can be safely treated as rational and reasonable yardstick for determination of ALV u/s 23 (1) (a) of the Income Tax Act He, in this respect also referred to the following decisions: I. Mrs. Sheila Kaushish Vs. CIT 131 ITR 435 (SC) 2. Diwan Daulat Kapoor Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee 122 ITR 700 (SC) 3. C/T Vs. Moni Kumar Subba 240 CTR 97 (Del) (FB) and 4. Smitaben N. Ambani Vs CWT 323 ITR 104 (Bom) properties at Corporate Park at Rs.4,44,27,866/- and in respect of the properties at Kamala Mill Compound at Rs.1,44,92,240/-. The AO further noted that even if, notio…

BHIRYANI DADLANI SALES AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3304/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 3303/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2007-08) आअसं. 3304/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2008-09) Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies Pvt. Ltd, Shop Nos.10-11, Kenwood Apartment Chs Ltd., Dr.Ambedkar Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 Pan: Aabcb 7448M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Ito- Ward 12(1)(3) Room No.145A, 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “एस एम सी” , मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं. 3303/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2007-08) आअसं. 3304/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2008-09) Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies PVT. Ltd, Shop Nos.10-11, Kenwood Apartment CHS Ltd., Dr.Ambedkar Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 PAN: AABCB 7448M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. ITO- Ward 12(1)(3) Room No.145A, 1st Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by : Shri Vimal Punmiya ""तवाद" "…

BHIRYANI DADLANI SALES AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3303/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 3303/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2007-08) आअसं. 3304/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2008-09) Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies Pvt. Ltd, Shop Nos.10-11, Kenwood Apartment Chs Ltd., Dr.Ambedkar Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 Pan: Aabcb 7448M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Ito- Ward 12(1)(3) Room No.145A, 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “एस एम सी” , मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं. 3303/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2007-08) आअसं. 3304/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2008-09) Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies PVT. Ltd, Shop Nos.10-11, Kenwood Apartment CHS Ltd., Dr.Ambedkar Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 PAN: AABCB 7448M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. ITO- Ward 12(1)(3) Room No.145A, 1st Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by : Shri Vimal Punmiya ""तवाद" "…

Showing 1–20 of 64 · Page 1 of 4