Ram Kanwar Rana v. ITO

159 ITD 431Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#10466 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(10AA)Section 10(10AA)(i)Section 10(10AA)(ii)Section 154

Issues it is cited on

section 10(10aa)section 10salarypersonnfactotal income

Judgments citing Ram Kanwar Rana v. ITO

RAVINDER SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-73, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 648/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2024AY 2020-21
Section 10Section 154

…f the Act, employees of several Universities, such as the Haryana Agricultural University and Mahatma Gandhi University, have been held to be holding civil posts under the State Government. The decisions are (i) Ram Kanwar Rana v. ITO [2016] 71 taxmann.com 54/159 ITD 431 (Delhi - Trib.), (ii) ITO (TDS) v. Mahatma Gandhi University [2019] 107 taxmann.com 186/73 ITR (Trib.) 44/177 ITD 508 (Cochin - Trib.), (iii) Dev Raj Sood v. ITO [ITA No. 905/Del/2017, dated 30-5-2017] (iv) Mahatma Gandhi University case (supra) and (v) Indra Kumari Bajaj v. ITO [ITA No. 2735/Del/2017, dated 4-12-2019]. 29. In light of the detail…

MOHAN SHRINIWAS BHISE,SANGLI vs. ITO WARD 3, SANGLI, SANGLI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes with the above directions

ITA 900/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amol R. KulkarniFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 10Section 10(10)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 44ASection 69

…s. ITO in ITA No. 375/NAG/2022 (Nagpur-Tribunal), dated 19.04.2024; iv. Smt. Sapna Raysoni Vs. ITO, 159 ITD 1 (Pune-Tribunal), dated 29.02.2016; v. ITO Vs. Mahatma Gandi University, 177 ITD 508 (Cochin Tribunal), dated 14.05.2019; vi. Ram Kanwar Rana Vs. ITO, 159 ITD 431 (Delhi-Tribunal), dated 16.06.2016; vii. Adinath Wandhekar Vs. ITO in ITA No. 1388/PUN/2023 (Pune- Tribunal), dated 08.03.2024; and viii. Ravindra Kharche Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 228/NAG/2023 (Nagpur- Tribunal), dated 16.04.2024. 6. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the order of Ld. AO/CIT(A) and submitted that since the assessee was an employ…

CHHITAR MAL JAIN ,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 113/JODH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Nov 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 70

…: 2019-20 employees of several Universities, such as the Haryana Agricultural University and Mahatma Gandhi University, have been held to be holding civil posts under the State Government. The decisions are (i) Ram Kanwar Rana v. ITO [2016] 71 taxmann.com 54/159 ITD 431 (Delhi - Trib.), (ii) ITO (TDS) v. Mahatma Gandhi University [2019] 107 taxmann.com 186/73 ITR (Trib.) 44/177 ITD 508 (Cochin - Trib.), (iii) Dev Raj Sood v. ITO [ITA No. 905/Del/2017, dated 30-5- 2017] (iv) Mahatma Gandhi University case (supra) and (v) Indra Kumari Bajaj v. ITO [ITA No. 2735/Del/2017, dated 4-12-2019]. 29. In light of the deta…

NATIONAL SILKWORM SEED ORGANISATION ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-18(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2011-12 to 2013-14

ITA 1875/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 201(1)

…distinguishable on facts and the ratio of which is not applicable to the case of the appellant. 7. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) ought to have followed the decisions of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Bench in Ram Kanwar Rana v. ITO 159 ITD 431 & Pune 'B' Bench in Smt. Sapna Sanjay ITA Nos. 1873 to 1875/Bang/2017 Page 4 of 13 Raisoni v. ITO 179 TTJ (Pune) (UO) 34 relied upon by the appellant and accordingly, ought to have held that the employees of the appellant are employees of the Central Government. 8. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) erred in not considering and adjudicating…

NATIONAL SILKWORM SEED ORGANIZATION ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-18(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2011-12 to 2013-14

ITA 1874/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 201(1)

…distinguishable on facts and the ratio of which is not applicable to the case of the appellant. 7. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) ought to have followed the decisions of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Bench in Ram Kanwar Rana v. ITO 159 ITD 431 & Pune 'B' Bench in Smt. Sapna Sanjay ITA Nos. 1873 to 1875/Bang/2017 Page 4 of 13 Raisoni v. ITO 179 TTJ (Pune) (UO) 34 relied upon by the appellant and accordingly, ought to have held that the employees of the appellant are employees of the Central Government. 8. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) erred in not considering and adjudicating…

NATIONAL SILKWORM SEED ORGANIZATION ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-18(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2011-12 to 2013-14

ITA 1873/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 201(1)

…distinguishable on facts and the ratio of which is not applicable to the case of the appellant. 7. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) ought to have followed the decisions of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Bench in Ram Kanwar Rana v. ITO 159 ITD 431 & Pune 'B' Bench in Smt. Sapna Sanjay ITA Nos. 1873 to 1875/Bang/2017 Page 4 of 13 Raisoni v. ITO 179 TTJ (Pune) (UO) 34 relied upon by the appellant and accordingly, ought to have held that the employees of the appellant are employees of the Central Government. 8. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) erred in not considering and adjudicating…

CENTRAL SILK BOARD MINISTRY OF TEXTILES ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS WARD-16(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1561/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pardeep Kumar, JCIT
Section 200(3)Section 201(1)Section 201(3)(i)

…s distinguishable on facts and the ratio of which is not applicable to the case of the appellant. 7. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) ought to have followed the decisions of the Hon'bl e Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Bench in Ram Kanwar Rana v ITO 159 ITD 431 & Pune 13. Bench in Smt. Sapna Sanjay Raisoni v. ITO 179 TTJ (Pune) (UO) 34 relied upon by the appellant and accordingly, ought to have held that the employees of the appellant are employees of the Central Government. 8. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) erred in holding that Ground Nos. 2. 13 & 14 are general in nature and, therefore, do not…

CENTRAL SILK BOARD MINISTRY OF TEXTILES ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS WARD-16(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1560/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pardeep Kumar, JCIT
Section 200(3)Section 201(1)Section 201(3)(i)

…s distinguishable on facts and the ratio of which is not applicable to the case of the appellant. 7. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) ought to have followed the decisions of the Hon'bl e Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Bench in Ram Kanwar Rana v ITO 159 ITD 431 & Pune 13. Bench in Smt. Sapna Sanjay Raisoni v. ITO 179 TTJ (Pune) (UO) 34 relied upon by the appellant and accordingly, ought to have held that the employees of the appellant are employees of the Central Government. 8. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) erred in holding that Ground Nos. 2. 13 & 14 are general in nature and, therefore, do not…

CENTRAL SILK BOARD MINISTRY OF TEXTILES ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS WARD-16(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1559/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pardeep Kumar, JCIT
Section 200(3)Section 201(1)Section 201(3)(i)

…s distinguishable on facts and the ratio of which is not applicable to the case of the appellant. 7. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) ought to have followed the decisions of the Hon'bl e Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Bench in Ram Kanwar Rana v ITO 159 ITD 431 & Pune 13. Bench in Smt. Sapna Sanjay Raisoni v. ITO 179 TTJ (Pune) (UO) 34 relied upon by the appellant and accordingly, ought to have held that the employees of the appellant are employees of the Central Government. 8. The learned Commissioner ( Appeals ) erred in holding that Ground Nos. 2. 13 & 14 are general in nature and, therefore, do not…

DURESH SHARMA,HISAR vs. ITO, HISAR

In the result appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

ITA 1379/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaita No. 1379/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh.Satyen Sethi, Arti Trana Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.C. Danday, CIT. D.R
Section 10Section 10(10)(i)Section 10(10)(ii)Section 10(10)(iii)

…e action of AO. Aggrieved with such order of CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 3 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that identical issue had come up before the Tribunal in the case of Ram Kanwar Rana vs. ITO reported in 159 ITD 431 and in the case of Dr. S.B.Kalidhar vs/ ITO vide ITA no. 1087.Del.2016 order dated 28th September, 2016 for assessment year 2009-10 where it has been held that assessee is entitle to claim exempt u/s 10(10)(i) to arrear of gratuity received to the extent of Rs. 6,50,000/- and encashment of leave salary. He accordingly submitted that this being a…