Shri Rajendra Madhukar Mahajan v. Income Tax Officer (14)

381 ITR 351High Court2016#24763 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148

Judgments citing Shri Rajendra Madhukar Mahajan v. Income Tax Officer (14)

Vinay Chaudhary, Pitampura vs. ACIT Int Tax 1(2)(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 3115/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: “Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 54Section 54FSection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’: NEW DELHI BEFORE “SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3115/Del/2023, A.Y. 2021-22 Vinay Chaudhary ACIT, LU-4, Pitampura, Circle-Int.Tax-1(2)(1), Delhi-110034 Vs. Civic Centre, New Delhi-110002 PAN: AHBPK1445R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Ms. Meenal Goyal, CA & Sh. Kunal Gupta, CA Respondent by Sh. M.S. Nethrapal, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 05/01/2026 Date of Pronouncement 02/04/2026 O R D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN , J.M.: This appeal is filed by the appellant/assessee against the final assessment orde…

Jeetendra Chandrakant Nayak, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Incom Tax(OSD), Nagpur

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

ITA 368/NAG/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri M.G.Moryani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA No. 368/Nag./2023 (Assessment Year : 2015-16) Shri Jeetendra Chandrakant Nayak, 254, Bajaj Nagar, Nagpur. ……………. Appellant PAN – AAQPN4090H v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, ……………. Respondent (OSD), Nagpur Assessee by : Shri M.G.Moryani, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Rajat Singhai, Sr. DR Date of Hearing – 27/06/2024 Date of Order – 27/06/2024 O R D E R PER K.M.ROY, A.M. The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 18/10/…

Manoj Tekriwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 24(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4147/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri G.P. MehtaFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar, Sr. AR CIT
Section 14ASection 234ASection 250Section 40Section 54

…at merely because taxpayer jointly owned another property on date of transfer of asset, its claim for exemption under section 54F could not be rejected in respect of capital gains earned from transfer of her individual property. In CIT vs Kapil Nagpal, [2016] 381 ITR 351 (Delhi), Hon’ble Delhi High Court also took the similar view and granted relief to the taxpayer under section 54F. 24. However, Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in CIT vs M.J. Siwani, [2014] 366 ITR 356 (Karnataka) took a contrary view and held that in terms of provisions of section 54F, where taxpayer on date of sale of long term capital asset owns…

Shri Rajendra Madhukar Mahajan v. Income Tax Officer (14) (381 ITR 351) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax