Sainath Estates (P) Ltd. v. Dy.CIT

80 Taxmann.com 374High Court2017#13011 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Judgments citing Sainath Estates (P) Ltd. v. Dy.CIT

MANJEERA PROJECTS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 15/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 143(3)Section 5Section 80I

…f the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act, the learned DR placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT (2009) 317 I…

MANJEERA PROJECTS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 956/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 143(3)Section 5Section 80I

…f the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act, the learned DR placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT (2009) 317 I…

MANJEERA PROJECTS ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1554/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 143(3)Section 5Section 80I

…f the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act, the learned DR placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT (2009) 317 I…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA SAHKARI AWAS SAMITI LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes and the COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2481/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT, DR
Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.2481 & 2482/Del/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 DCIT, Vs Sahara India Sahkari Awas Central Circle-6, Samiti Ltd., Room No.334, Sahara Bhawan, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., 1, Kapoorthala Complex, New Delhi. Aliganj, Lucknow. PAN: AAGFS9137D CO Nos.221 & 222/Del/2011 (ITA Nos.2481 & 2482/Del/2011) Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 Sahara India Sahkari Awas Vs. DCIT, Samiti Ltd., Central Circle-6, Sahara Bhawan, Room No.334, 1, Kapoorthala Complex, A…

MANJEERA PROJECTS, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1082/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…f the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act, the learned DR placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT (2009) 317…

MANJEERA PROJECTS, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1230/HYD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…f the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act, the learned DR placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT (2009) 317…

MANJEERA PROJECTS,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-6(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 1704/HYD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. K. Srinivas Reddy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 80Section 801B(10)Section 80I

…f the Act. The learned DR placed reliance upon the following decisions: a) CIT Bhopal vs. Global Reality, reported in (2015) 379 ITR 107 (M.P) b) Sainath Estates (P) Ltd vs. Dy.CIT (2013) 26 ITR (T) 55 (Hyd.Trib.) c) CIT Lucknow vs. Arif Industries Ltd (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 d) Dy.CIT CO-Circle (VI)(1) vs. Marco Marwell Projects Ltd (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 249 (Chennai Trib.). 14. On the issue of interest income from margin money not being eligible for deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act, the learned DR placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT (2009) 317…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PADMINI INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 4065/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiay: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Taneja
Section 115Section 80

…built up area” was only prospective in nature and, therefore, prior to 01/04/2005, in calculating the area of a residential unit, area covered by a balcony was to be excluded. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of reported in (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 374 (Allahabad) for the proposition that prior to 01/04/2005, the definition of built up area would exclude area covered I.T.A. No. 4065/Del/2010 Assessment year: 2006-07 by a balcony. The Ld. authorised representative placed extensive reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) and argued that the deduction had been rightly allowed by the…

Sainath Estates (P) Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (80 Taxmann.com 374) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax