Ramesh Abaji Walavalkar v. Addl.CIT

54 SOT 15Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#25227 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Judgments citing Ramesh Abaji Walavalkar v. Addl.CIT

DCIT -26(1), Mumbai vs. Shreyas Builders, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2404/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2404/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit-17(1) बिधम/ Shreyas Builders Room No. 117, 1St Floor, G- A-42, 4Th Floor Roop Vs. Block, Kautliya Bhavan, Darshan, Juhu Lane, Bandra Kurla Complex, Andheri (West), Mumbai- Mumbai-400051. 400058. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aapfs5485E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bhadresh Doshi Revenue By: Dr. Kishor Dhule (Cit,Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Nfac, [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit”], Delhi Dated 08.05.2023 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. In The Several Grounds Raised In The Appeal, The Revenue Has Agitated The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Holding That The Assessee Was Engaged In The Business Of Real Estate Development & Therefore The Plot Of Land Held By It Was In Nature Of ‘Stock-In-Trade’ As Opposed To The Ao’S Action Of Holding The Said Plot Of Land To Be In Nature Of ‘Capital Asset’. According To Revenue Therefore, Since The Said Plot Of Land To Be In Nature Of ‘Capital Asset’, The Levy Of Capital Gains Tax Stood Triggered Upon Execution Of Joint Development Agreement (Herein

For Appellant: Shri Bhadresh DoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule (CIT,DR)

Section 2(47)(v)

…of the property before it finally entered into a development agreement and entrusted the work of development to the third-party. These decisions are Vidhyavihar Containers Ltd. vs. DCIT [2011] 133 ITD 363 (Mumbai), Ramesh Abaji Walavaikar vs. Addl. CIT [2012] 54 SOT 15 (Mumbai) and Fardeen Khan vs. ACIT [2015] 58 taxmann.com 186 (Mumbai- Trib). 3.9 Though these cases of the ITAT were in the context of deciding whether the assessee which was engaged in the business of manufacturing earlier should be considered to have started the business of real estate development, the observations on the basis of which the fina…

Amrutbhai G Prajapati, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Mehsana

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on preliminary legal ground alone without going into merits of the case

ITA 362/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Shah, Advocate & Shri

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151

…Appeal(L) No.2362 of 2009 dtd. 1.12.2009 has held that for failure to issue notice reassessment held to be not valid. Section 292BB does not have retrospective effect. - The Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Ramesh Abaji Walavalkar Vs. Addl.CIT (2012) 54 SOT 15 (URO) has also held that reassessment made by the AO u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 without issuing notice u/s. 143(2) is invalid. - The Hon'ble ITAT Kochin Bench in the case of B.R. Sreekumar Vs. ITO (2012) 136 ITD 257 (TM) has held that issue of notice u/s. 143(2) is mandatory which has to be issued before passing assessment order. - The Hon'ble Delhi…

The ITO, Ward-5(2)(4), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Parimal Sureshbhai Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2366/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2366/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri B. L. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 292B