Skyline Great Hills v. Commissioner of Income Tax

68 Taxmann.com 188High Court2016#11761 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 251(2)Section 69ASection 154Section 263Section 133A

Issues it is cited on

section 31(3)joint development agreementsection 31section 251(2)cost of improvementright to receivecreditworthiness of the creditorsection 251(1)section 251(1)(a)mercantile system of accountingsection 251reasoned order

Judgments citing Skyline Great Hills v. Commissioner of Income Tax

DCIT Central Circle 8 2 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Skyline Greathills, Mumbai

ITA 3904/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain, ARFor Respondent: I.T.A. No.3904/Mum/2025
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 251Section 271(1)(c)

…es a business receipt. The issue was further challenged before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay, wherein the question raised by the revenue was dismissed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court vide order dated 16.02.2016 (ITA No. 2299 of 2013) [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 188 (Bom.), the issue has been decided by the ITAT regarding addition under section 2(22)(e), challenged by revenue was dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court with the observation that no addition in the hands of assessee can be made, at the most if any dividend in terms of provisions of section 2(22)(e) has to be added the same can be taxed in t…

Skyline Greathills, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 8(2), Mumbai

ITA 3466/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain, ARFor Respondent: I.T.A. No.3904/Mum/2025
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 251Section 271(1)(c)

…es a business receipt. The issue was further challenged before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay, wherein the question raised by the revenue was dismissed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court vide order dated 16.02.2016 (ITA No. 2299 of 2013) [2016] 68 Taxmann.com 188 (Bom.), the issue has been decided by the ITAT regarding addition under section 2(22)(e), challenged by revenue was dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court with the observation that no addition in the hands of assessee can be made, at the most if any dividend in terms of provisions of section 2(22)(e) has to be added the same can be taxed in t…

Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, Hyderabad vs. DCIT(A), Chennai

ITA 993/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 251(2)Section 69A

…PAGE-2 :-2-: ITA Nos: 991, 992, 993, 1639 & 1644/Chny/2025 The present batch of appeals comprises ITA Nos.991 to 993/Chny/2025 pertaining to the Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18, which have been preferred by the assessee. Further, ITA Nos.1639 and 1664/Chny/2025 relating to the Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2017-18 have been preferred by the Revenue. Since common issues are involved in these appeals, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 04 days in filing the appeal by th…

Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, Hyderabad vs. DCIT(A), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 992/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 251(2)Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस एस "व"वने" र"व, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद"य के सम$BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 991, 992 & 993/Chny/2025 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, DCIT, 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, vs. Central Circle -3(4), Banjara Hills, Chennai. Hyderabad – 500 034. [PAN: AABHM-8414-M] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1639 & 1644/Chny/2025 "नधा%रण वष% /…

Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, Hyderabad vs. DCIT(A), Chennai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 991/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 251(2)Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एस एस "व"वने" र"व, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद"य के सम$BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 991, 992 & 993/Chny/2025 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, DCIT, 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, vs. Central Circle -3(4), Banjara Hills, Chennai. Hyderabad – 500 034. [PAN: AABHM-8414-M] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1639 & 1644/Chny/2025 "नधा%रण वष% /…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, Chennai

ITA 1644/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 991, 992 & 993/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034. [Pan: Aabhm-8414-M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Dcit, Vs. Central Circle -3(4), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1639 & 1644/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle -3(4), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, Vs. 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034. [Pan: Aabhm-8414-M] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Department By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02.03.2026 आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : :-2-:

For Appellant: Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 251(2)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'ए' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री एस एस विश्वनेत्र रवि, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्षBEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 991, 992 & 993/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034. [PAN: AABHM-8414-M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) DCIT, vs. Central Circle -3(4), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1639 & 1644/Chny…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, Chennai

ITA 1639/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 991, 992 & 993/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034. [Pan: Aabhm-8414-M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Dcit, Vs. Central Circle -3(4), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1639 & 1644/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 Acit, Central Circle -3(4), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, Vs. 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034. [Pan: Aabhm-8414-M] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Department By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02.03.2026 आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am : :-2-:

For Appellant: Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, CAFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 251(2)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'ए' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री एस एस विश्वनेत्र रवि, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्षBEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 991, 992 & 993/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Menakuru Sukumar Reddy, 8-2-696-697, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034. [PAN: AABHM-8414-M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) DCIT, vs. Central Circle -3(4), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1639 & 1644/Chny…

Grr Holdings, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle -3 (3), Hyderabad

ITA 92/HYD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Grr Holdings Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 3(3) Pan:Aaqfg0867M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Murali Mohan Rao, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.3.2022 Passed U/S 263 Of The I.T. Act, 1961 By The Learned Pr.Cit (Central) Hyderabad Relating To A.Y. 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Incorporated On 31.1.2014 & Is In The Business Of Real Estate. It Did Not File Its Original Return Of Income For The A.Y 2014- 15. A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Of The I.T. Act Was Conducted On 20.9.2017. In Response To Notice U/S 153A Dated 11.5.2018, No Return Of Income Was Filed. The Ar Of The Assessee Also Refused To Appear When Contacted By The Assessing Officer. Subsequently, The Partner Of The Assessee Firm Shri Gaddam Shyam

For Appellant: Shri Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 144Section 153ASection 263Section 69

…earned PCIT invoking the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the I.T. Act is not in accordance with law. i) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd (2013) 38 Taxmann.com 100 (S.C) ii) Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Skyline Great Hills (68 Taxmann.com 188) iii) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Co. Ltd (1959) 3 ITR 1 iv) Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Canon India (P) Ltd (2016) 66 Taxmann.com 88 v) ITAT Kolkatta in the case of Magma Fincorp Ltd vs. DCIT (2017) (82 taxmann.com 481) vi) ITAT Mumbai in the case of Mahindra Telecommunications Investment (P) Ltd vs.…

Valuelabs Technologies, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1718/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA-TP No. 1718/H/2019 A.Y.: 2015-16 Value Labs Technologies, Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Hyderabad. Income-tax, Circle – 8(1), PAN – AAIFV 6716 G Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Revenue by: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Date of hearing: 11/10/2021 Date of pronouncement: 29/11/2021 O R D E R PER BENCH: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C…

Skyline Great Hills v. Commissioner of Income Tax (68 Taxmann.com 188) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax