Park View Enterprises v. State Govt. of Tamil Nadu

189 ITR 192High Court1991#15167 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2022.

Judgments citing Park View Enterprises v. State Govt. of Tamil Nadu

Shri Mayank Ratibhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2011/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2011/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2012-2013 Shri Mayank Ratibhai Patel, I.T.O, B/10, Rajhans Society, Vs. Ward-5(2)(3), Nr. New Commercial Society, Ahmedabad. Nr. Reliance Fresh Shop, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-360009. Pan: Alwpp5126H

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divitia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.D.R
Section 250Section 36

…in the relevant year that the borrowings were utilized for non-business purposes. Therefore, no disallowance could be made in the current year towards interest on opening balance.-. In this regard, the appellant has relied upon decision of Sridev Enterprises 189 ITR 192 Karnataka HC wherein it was held that unless there was a finding in the year of borrowing about the non-business purposes no disallowance could be made in the subsequent years. The appellant has also contended that the AO has failed to appreciate that the investment in land and interest free advances should be presumed to have been made out of in…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4793/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dlf Limited Jcit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

…that a person who bonafidely puts up constructions on land belonging to others with their permission would not be a trespasser, nor would the buildings so constructed vest in the owner of the land. (i) Park View Enterprises Vs State Govt. of Tamil Nadu [1991] 189 ITR 192. (ii) The Privy Council in Narayan Das Khettry v. Jatindra Nath Roy Chowdhry, AIR 1927 PC 135, has also taken the view that having regard to the law in India it is possible to have separation of ownership of the building from the ownership of the land. Page 7 of 61 (iii) This view of the Privy Council was approved by the Supreme Court in Bishan…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4187/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dlf Limited Jcit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

…that a person who bonafidely puts up constructions on land belonging to others with their permission would not be a trespasser, nor would the buildings so constructed vest in the owner of the land. (i) Park View Enterprises Vs State Govt. of Tamil Nadu [1991] 189 ITR 192. (ii) The Privy Council in Narayan Das Khettry v. Jatindra Nath Roy Chowdhry, AIR 1927 PC 135, has also taken the view that having regard to the law in India it is possible to have separation of ownership of the building from the ownership of the land. Page 7 of 61 (iii) This view of the Privy Council was approved by the Supreme Court in Bishan…

Shivakumar Kheny (HUF), Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-6(3)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 792/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 45Section 54

…on which building was constructed. He was of the view that the Assessee did not have any right to alienate the superstructure. 5. It was the plea of the Assessee based on a decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Park View enterprises (1991) 189 ITR 192 that in law there can be two different owners of the land and the building constructed on a land and that had occasion to consider whether two different persons could own the land and building separately. Reference was also made to Sections 63A, 108(h) and 8 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 to further the proposition that the owner of land n…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2749/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi & Shri SatyajeetFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Rai, Adv. Special counsel
Section 10Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

…that a person who bonafidely puts up constructions on land belonging to others with their permission would not be a trespasser, nor would the buildings so constructed vest in the owner of the land. (i) Park View Enterprises Vs State Govt. of Tamil Nadu [1991] 189 ITR 192. I.T.A. No.2126 & 2749/DEL/2013 45 (ii) The Privy Council in Narayan Das Khettry v. Jatindra Nath Roy Chowdhry, AIR 1927 PC 135, has also taken the view that having regard to the law in India it is possible to have separation of ownership of the building from the ownership of the land. (iii) This view of the Privy Council was approved by the Su…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 2126/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi & Shri SatyajeetFor Respondent: Shri Puneet Rai, Adv. Special counsel
Section 10Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

…that a person who bonafidely puts up constructions on land belonging to others with their permission would not be a trespasser, nor would the buildings so constructed vest in the owner of the land. (i) Park View Enterprises Vs State Govt. of Tamil Nadu [1991] 189 ITR 192. I.T.A. No.2126 & 2749/DEL/2013 45 (ii) The Privy Council in Narayan Das Khettry v. Jatindra Nath Roy Chowdhry, AIR 1927 PC 135, has also taken the view that having regard to the law in India it is possible to have separation of ownership of the building from the ownership of the land. (iii) This view of the Privy Council was approved by the Su…

Park View Enterprises v. State Govt. of Tamil Nadu (189 ITR 192) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax