Naresh Sunderlal Chug v. Income Tax Officer

171 ITD 116Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2018#13583 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 331,145 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 142ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 245HA

Issues it is cited on

income from other sourcestotal incomedocument

Judgments citing Naresh Sunderlal Chug v. Income Tax Officer

Ajay Bakliwal, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Cirle, Kota

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

ITA 1277/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Apr 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Rajendra SisodiaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…the appeal on the merits on all aspects in order to render justice by virtue of exercise of the appellate power vested with him. The ITAT Pune Bench 'A' in the case of Naresh Sunderlal Chug vs. ITO, Ward 8(1) Pune [2018] 93 taxman.com 485 (Pune-Trib.)/[2018] 171 ITD 116 (Pune-Trib.) [12.04.2018] held as under:- x x x x As held in the above order, the powers of CIT(A) are conterminous with the power of Assessing Officer. In other words, the CIT(A) has wide power while deciding the appeal. Hence, the argument of the appellant are not found to be acceptable. As per Clause(2) of Section 251 of the Act, it is prov…

Bimla, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-38(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 7973/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekbimla, Vs. Ito, Ward 38 (5), H.No.143, Village Hamidpur, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 036. (Pan : Bpdpb9344B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Shri Ankit Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.09.2024 Date Of Order : 26.11.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals-13, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’) Dated 23.07.2019 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,23,030/- On 14.08.2014. The Return Of Income Was Processed Under Section 143 (1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’). The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass & Notices

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143Section 143(2)Section 69

…443; (iii) CIT vs. Union Tyres 240 ITR 556; (iv) CIT vs. Sardari Lal & Co. 251 ITR 864; (v) CIT vs. B.P. Sherafudin 399 ITR 524 (Ker); (vi) Nababharat Shiksha Parishad vs. DCIT in ITA No.163/CTK/2015 dated 11 October 2017; (vii) Naresh Sunderlal Chug vs. ITO 171 ITD 116; (viii) Tulsi Tracom (P) Ltd. vs. CIT6 86 taxmann.com 35; (ix) Cairn India Ltd. vs. DIT (IT) 87 taxmann.com 310 (Madras); (x) J.T. (India) Exports and Anr. Vs. UOI 262 ITR 269 (FB) (Del.). 13. With regard to addition of stamp duty, ld. AR submitted that assessee prefers not to press this ground. 14. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue subm…

M/S. Angelica Properties Private Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner Income-Tax

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1738/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Hon’Ble Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No: 403/Pun/2015 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vason Engineers Ltd., Theadditional Commissioner Of (Formerly Angelica Properties Pvt. Vs Income Tax, Range1, Pune. Ltd.,) 301, Phoenix, Opp.Residency Club, Bund Garden Road, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aafca 8644 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No: 1738/Pun/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Angelica Properties Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Opp. Grand Hyatt Hotel, Vs Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vimannagar, Puune – 411 014. Pan: Aafca 8644 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Dharmesh Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Naveen Gupta – Dr Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Pune Dated 30.01.2015 & 09.06.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 Respectively. 2. The Assessee In Ita No.403/Pun/2015 For The A.Y.2010-11 Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts Enhancing The Income From Sale Of ‘Matrix It Building’ By Changing The Head Of Income From Capital Gains To Business Income Without Complying With The Principles Of Natural Justice & Without Giving Any Opportunity Of Hearing.

Section 14A

…ncement and also provide reasons and basis for carrying out the said enhancement so as to enable the assessee to file its submissions. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Pune Tribunal in the case of Naresh Sunderlal Chug v. ITO [171 ITD 116] [Page 570-577 of PB No. 3]. Thus, the enhancement made by the Ld. CIT(A) is beyond jurisdiction. 7.6. In the present case, as explained earlier, the issue of treatment of the transactions of sale of assets and rental income as business income was never a subject matter of assessment and that no application of mind was ever, was made by the Ld. A…

Vascon Engineers Ltd (Successor to Angelica Properties Pvt. Ltd.), Pune vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 403/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Hon’Ble Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No: 403/Pun/2015 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vason Engineers Ltd., Theadditional Commissioner Of (Formerly Angelica Properties Pvt. Vs Income Tax, Range1, Pune. Ltd.,) 301, Phoenix, Opp.Residency Club, Bund Garden Road, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aafca 8644 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No: 1738/Pun/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Angelica Properties Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Opp. Grand Hyatt Hotel, Vs Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vimannagar, Puune – 411 014. Pan: Aafca 8644 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Dharmesh Shah – Ar Revenue By Shri Naveen Gupta – Dr Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Pune Dated 30.01.2015 & 09.06.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 Respectively. 2. The Assessee In Ita No.403/Pun/2015 For The A.Y.2010-11 Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts Enhancing The Income From Sale Of ‘Matrix It Building’ By Changing The Head Of Income From Capital Gains To Business Income Without Complying With The Principles Of Natural Justice & Without Giving Any Opportunity Of Hearing.

Section 14A

…ncement and also provide reasons and basis for carrying out the said enhancement so as to enable the assessee to file its submissions. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Pune Tribunal in the case of Naresh Sunderlal Chug v. ITO [171 ITD 116] [Page 570-577 of PB No. 3]. Thus, the enhancement made by the Ld. CIT(A) is beyond jurisdiction. 7.6. In the present case, as explained earlier, the issue of treatment of the transactions of sale of assets and rental income as business income was never a subject matter of assessment and that no application of mind was ever, was made by the Ld. A…

Rashmi Ameya Developers Housing & Estate Realtors P. Ltd., Palghar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Thane

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1990/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 Rashmi Ameya Developers Acit, Central Circle-3, 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Road No. Housing & Estate Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Vs. D Ii, 01 02, Akanksha Commercial 16Z, Wagale Industrial Estate, Complex, Opp. Sajavat Complex, Thane-400 604. Achole Road, Nallasopara, Dist. Palghar-401 203. Pan No. Aaecr 8508 H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Subhodh Ratnaparkhi, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Prabhat Kumar Gupta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 Rashmi Ameya Developers ACIT, Central Circle-3, 6th floor, Ashar IT Park, Road No. Housing & Estate Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Vs. D II, 01 02, Akanksha Commercial 16Z, Wagale Industrial Estate, Complex, Opp. Sajavat Complex, Thane-400 604. Achole Road, Nallasopara, Dist. Palghar-401 203. PAN No. AAECR 8508 H Appellant Respondent Assessee…

Prem Manohar Gupta, Kanpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Kanpur

In the result, appeal in I

ITA 512/LKW/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 251Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…law and therefore, the order of learned CIT(A) directing the Assessing Officer to make further disallowance is null and void keeping in view the decision of Hon'ble Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Naresh Sunderlal Chug vs. Income Tax Officer [2018] 171 ITD 116 (Pune Trib.) and further reliance was placed on the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Bikram Singh vs. DCIT [2016] 48 ITR (T) 689 (Delhi Trib.). Therefore, it was prayed that order of learned CIT(A) to this extent be held as null and void. 5. Learned D. R., on the other hand, heavily relied on the orders of the authorities b…

Prem Manohar Gupta, Kanpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Kanpur

In the result, appeal in I

ITA 511/LKW/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 251Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…law and therefore, the order of learned CIT(A) directing the Assessing Officer to make further disallowance is null and void keeping in view the decision of Hon'ble Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Naresh Sunderlal Chug vs. Income Tax Officer [2018] 171 ITD 116 (Pune Trib.) and further reliance was placed on the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Bikram Singh vs. DCIT [2016] 48 ITR (T) 689 (Delhi Trib.). Therefore, it was prayed that order of learned CIT(A) to this extent be held as null and void. 5. Learned D. R., on the other hand, heavily relied on the orders of the authorities b…