RustomHomiVakil v. Assistant Commissioner of Income

69 Taxmann.com 42Reported decision2016#25495 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2021.

Judgments citing RustomHomiVakil v. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Manish Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

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

ITA 5548/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Manish Tyagi, Vs. Ito, House No. 131, Sector-6, Ward-1(4), Chiranjeev Vihar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Pan: Acgpt1413J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Prem Late Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Dudeja, Sr. DR

Section 160Section 160(1)(i)Section 161(1)Section 163Section 2(14)Section 48Section 54F

…On filing appeal by the Revenue, High Court held that it was a case of construction u/s 54F. Since the construction was carried out within the outer limit of 03 years, assessee was entitled to benefit u/s 54 of the Act. k) In Rustam Homy Vakil vs ACIT (2016) 69 Taxmann.com 42 (Mum-Triob), Mumbai Bench of Tribunal held that when the tax- payer is allowed to purchase or construct residential house without any ceiling as to the amount of investment u/s 54, then merely because tax-payer has purchased a residential house and thereafter followed it with alterations and modifications carried out to make said house habi…

Shantanu Kumar Bose, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 33(1), New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 3051/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 54ESection 54F

…Kapoor [1998] 234 ITR 753 (Allahabad) 3. Tarun Jalali Vs. DDIT- ITa No. 2376/Del/2014 (Del. Trib.) 4. B. B. Sarkar Vs. CIT(A) [1981] 7 Taxman 239 (Cal.) 5. Mrs. Rahana Siraj Vs. CIT(A) [2015] 58 taxmann.com 333 (Karnataka) 6. Rustom Homi Vakil Vs. ACIT [2016] 69 Taxmann.com 42 (Trib.- Mumbai) 7. Mrs. Gulshanbanoo R. Mukhi Vs. JCIT [2002] 83 ITD 649 (Trib.- Mum) 8. CBDT Circular 667, dated 18/10/1993 9. CIT(A) Vs. Bharti Mishra [2014] 41 Taxmann.com 50 (Delhi) 10. CIT(A) Vs. Kuldeep Singh [2014] 49 taxmann.com 167 (Delhi) 11. Narasimha Raju Rudra Raju Vs. ACIT [2013] 35 taxmann.com 90 (Hyderabad-Trib.) 12. Smt. V.…

Dr. Kushagra Katariya, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1452/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT(DR)

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 234BSection 271(1)Section 54Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2011-12] Dr. Kushagra Kataria, vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), 5th floor, HSSIDC Building, C/o S. Talwar & Co., 409, Sector-31, Udyog Vihar, Phase-V Gurgaon Gurgaon (PAN: AKWPK6521-E) [Appellant] [RESPONDENT] Assessee by : Shri Arvind Kumar, Adv. & Ms. Sudha Gupta, CA Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT(DR) ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM The Assessee has filed this Appeal against the Order dated 13.1.2016 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Gurg…