Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (

139 ITD 504Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#5421 most cited

What is Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT ( authority for?

The annual value of a property lying vacant is assessed at 'NIL' in terms of Section 23(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd v DCIT · Section 23(1)(c) · annual value · property lying vacant · NIL annual value · vacant property income

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(c)Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

self occupied propertysection 80lsection 23(2)section 23(1)section 2(31)annual letting valueinterest on interestannual valuesection 22section 40a(3)share application moneyaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2776/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…he Tribunal wherein on similar facts 85 circumstances and having regard to provisions of Section 23(l)(c), the annual value of the property which was lying vacant was assessed at ‘NIL’. - Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (173 ITD 82) ACIT Vs Dr. Prabha Sanghi (139 ITD 504) (ITAT Delhi) - ITO Vs Metaoxide Pvt Ltd (170 ITD 235) (ITAT Mumbai) - S.R. Tendulkar Vs Dy.CIT (172 ITD 266) (ITAT Mumbai) - Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT (110 ITD 158) (Mumbai) - In view of the above the appellant submits that even in the alternate the 3.7 annual value of the property has to be assessed at ‘NIL’ in terms of Section 23…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2775/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…he Tribunal wherein on similar facts 85 circumstances and having regard to provisions of Section 23(l)(c), the annual value of the property which was lying vacant was assessed at ‘NIL’. - Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (173 ITD 82) ACIT Vs Dr. Prabha Sanghi (139 ITD 504) (ITAT Delhi) - ITO Vs Metaoxide Pvt Ltd (170 ITD 235) (ITAT Mumbai) - S.R. Tendulkar Vs Dy.CIT (172 ITD 266) (ITAT Mumbai) - Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT (110 ITD 158) (Mumbai) - In view of the above the appellant submits that even in the alternate the 3.7 annual value of the property has to be assessed at ‘NIL’ in terms of Section 23…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2774/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…he Tribunal wherein on similar facts 85 circumstances and having regard to provisions of Section 23(l)(c), the annual value of the property which was lying vacant was assessed at ‘NIL’. - Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (173 ITD 82) ACIT Vs Dr. Prabha Sanghi (139 ITD 504) (ITAT Delhi) - ITO Vs Metaoxide Pvt Ltd (170 ITD 235) (ITAT Mumbai) - S.R. Tendulkar Vs Dy.CIT (172 ITD 266) (ITAT Mumbai) - Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT (110 ITD 158) (Mumbai) - In view of the above the appellant submits that even in the alternate the 3.7 annual value of the property has to be assessed at ‘NIL’ in terms of Section 23…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2773/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…he Tribunal wherein on similar facts 85 circumstances and having regard to provisions of Section 23(l)(c), the annual value of the property which was lying vacant was assessed at ‘NIL’. - Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (173 ITD 82) ACIT Vs Dr. Prabha Sanghi (139 ITD 504) (ITAT Delhi) - ITO Vs Metaoxide Pvt Ltd (170 ITD 235) (ITAT Mumbai) - S.R. Tendulkar Vs Dy.CIT (172 ITD 266) (ITAT Mumbai) - Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT (110 ITD 158) (Mumbai) - In view of the above the appellant submits that even in the alternate the 3.7 annual value of the property has to be assessed at ‘NIL’ in terms of Section 23…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2772/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…he Tribunal wherein on similar facts 85 circumstances and having regard to provisions of Section 23(l)(c), the annual value of the property which was lying vacant was assessed at ‘NIL’. - Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (173 ITD 82) ACIT Vs Dr. Prabha Sanghi (139 ITD 504) (ITAT Delhi) - ITO Vs Metaoxide Pvt Ltd (170 ITD 235) (ITAT Mumbai) - S.R. Tendulkar Vs Dy.CIT (172 ITD 266) (ITAT Mumbai) - Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT (110 ITD 158) (Mumbai) - In view of the above the appellant submits that even in the alternate the 3.7 annual value of the property has to be assessed at ‘NIL’ in terms of Section 23…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTER CIRCLE-4, DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2771/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…he Tribunal wherein on similar facts 85 circumstances and having regard to provisions of Section 23(l)(c), the annual value of the property which was lying vacant was assessed at ‘NIL’. - Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (173 ITD 82) ACIT Vs Dr. Prabha Sanghi (139 ITD 504) (ITAT Delhi) - ITO Vs Metaoxide Pvt Ltd (170 ITD 235) (ITAT Mumbai) - S.R. Tendulkar Vs Dy.CIT (172 ITD 266) (ITAT Mumbai) - Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT (110 ITD 158) (Mumbai) - In view of the above the appellant submits that even in the alternate the 3.7 annual value of the property has to be assessed at ‘NIL’ in terms of Section 23…

THE KUMAR FAMILY TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2770/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…he Tribunal wherein on similar facts 85 circumstances and having regard to provisions of Section 23(l)(c), the annual value of the property which was lying vacant was assessed at ‘NIL’. - Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (173 ITD 82) ACIT Vs Dr. Prabha Sanghi (139 ITD 504) (ITAT Delhi) - ITO Vs Metaoxide Pvt Ltd (170 ITD 235) (ITAT Mumbai) - S.R. Tendulkar Vs Dy.CIT (172 ITD 266) (ITAT Mumbai) - Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs ACIT (110 ITD 158) (Mumbai) - In view of the above the appellant submits that even in the alternate the 3.7 annual value of the property has to be assessed at ‘NIL’ in terms of Section 23…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2731/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Dcit, Vs Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ugf-15, Indraprastha Building, 21, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan-Aaaca0377R Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80I

…TO - [2018] 172 ITD 339 (Jaipur ITAT) • Sachin R. Tendulkar v. 172 ITD 266 (Mumbai - Trib.) • Sonu Realtors (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT: [2018] 173 ITD 82 (Mumbai - Trib.) • Saif Ali Khan Pataudi v. ACIT: [2018] 172 ITD 345 (Mumbai - Trib.) • ACIT v. Dr. Prabha Sanghi: 139 ITD 504 (Del.) • Vikas Keshav Garud v. ITO: 160 ITD 7 (Pune. Trib.) • S.M. Chandrashekar v. ITO: 76 taxman.com 278 (Bang. Trib.) • Bengal DCL Housing Development Co. Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT: 201 TTJ 353 (Kol. Trib.) Without prejudice, it is respectfully submitted that notional ALV cannot be computed for the unsold stock since the flats/space are not in a habita…

SONU REALTORS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - 14 (3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5081/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon. & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon.M/S. Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-14(3)(2), Plot No. 219, Laalasis, 11Th Mumbai Road, Chembur, Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…issue raised before us is squarely covered by the orders of the coordinate benches of the Tribunal in the case of viz. (i). Vikas Keshav Garud Vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Nashik (2016) 160 ITD 7 (Pune) (ii). ACIT, Circle-47(1), New Delhi Vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi (2012) 139 ITD 504 (Del); (iii). Premsudha Exports (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle 10, Mumbai (2008) 110 ITD 158 (Mum); and (iv). Informed Technologies India Ltd. Vs. DCIT3(2), Mumbai (2017) 162 ITD 153 (Mum). We find that in the case of Informed technologies India Ltd. (supra) the Tribunal after deliberating at length on the issue as regards the scope and gamut…

SURPREET SINGH SURI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6 , NEW DLEHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6536/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6536/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Surpreet Singh Suri, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income C/O Sanjiv Sapra & Associates Tax, Central Circle-6, Llp, Chartered Accountants, New Delhi C-763, New Friends Colony, New Delhi-110025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aohps9046K Assessee By : Sh. Sanjiv Sapra, Fca Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.09.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjiv Sapra, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)Section 234ASection 24

…quoted the following case laws in support of his arguments: " Premsudha Exports P. Ltd. Vs ACIT 110 ITD 158 (ITAT Mumbai) " Smt. Indu Chandra Vs DCIT in ITA No. 96/Lkw/2011 3 Surpreet Singh Suri " Smt. Shankuntala Devi Vs DCIT in " ACIT Vs Dr. Prabha Sanghi 139 ITD 504 (ITAT Delhi) 5. He argued that the ld. CIT (A) has not been able to distinguish these judgments and has merely denied the vacancy allowance as available u/s 23(1)(c) of the Act on the ground that the same is only available if the property is let out at least once. No condition of such nature as alleged by the ld. CIT (A) is specified in Section 2…

SUNITA SANJAY KEDIA,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD-4(3), GURGAON

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

ITA 1937/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2013-14 Sunita Sanjay Kedia, Vs. Ito, B-404, Central Park, Ward-4(3), Sector-42, Gurgaon. Gurgaon. Pan: Abipk6266D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri P.S. Thuingaleng, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.12.2018 Order

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.S. Thuingaleng, Sr.DR
Section 22Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(c)Section 24

…year due to non-availability of suitable tenant. No other benefit was derived by the assessee from this property during the year under consideration. Relying on the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi (2013) 139 ITD 504 and various other decisions, he submitted that the addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the CIT(A) deserves to be deleted. He also relied on the following decisions:- 3 (i) Saif Ali Khan Pataudi vs. ACIT (2018) 53 CCH 486 (Mum. Trib.); and (ii) Sachin R. Tendulkar vs. DCIT, ITA No.3755/Mum/2016, Order dated 10.08.2018. 6. The…

MS. PRIYANANKI SINGH SOOD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 6698/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri U.N. Marwah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shailesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 23(1)(A)Section 23(1)(c)Section 24

…ITA No. 6698/Del/2015 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2012-13 Ms. Priyananki Singh Sood vs. ACIT 2nd Floor, EROS Cinema Building, Circle 52(1) Jangpura Extension, New Delhi. New Delhi PAN No. AODPS0629C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri U.N. Marwah, CA Department by : Shri Shailesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11/12/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 13/12/2018 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 26/10/15 pass…

SONU REALTORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(3)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 66/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No. 2892 /Mum/2016 & Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Dcit – 14(3)(2) Plot No. 219, Laalasis, Mumbai 11Th Road, Chembur, Vs. Mumbai 400 071. Pan – Aaacs7073C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. J.P Bairagra Respondent By : Shri Rajat Mittal Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement :19.09.2018 O R D E R Per Ravish Sood, Jm The Present Appeals Filed By The Assessee For A.Y 2011-12 & A.Y 2012-13 Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(A)-22, Mumbai, Dated 22.01.2016 & 27.09.2016. As A Common Issue Is Involved In The Aforementioned Appeals, Thus, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Off Together By Way Of A Consolidate Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y 2011-12. The Assessee Assailing The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Has Raised Before Us The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: Shri. J.P BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(2)Section 22Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…Technologies India Ltd. Vs. DCIT-3(2), Mumbai (2017) 162 ITD 153 (Mum) Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-14(3)(2), Mumbai 5 ITA No. 2892/Mum/2016 & ITA No. 66/Mum/2017 A.Ys 2011-12 & 2012-13 (iii). ACIT, Circle-47(1), New Delhi Vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi (2012) 139 ITD 504 (Del) In the backdrop of his aforesaid contentions, it was submitted by the ld. A.R that as the CIT(A) had erred in concluding that the provisions of Sec. 23(1)(c) would not be applicable for determining the „annual value‟ of the property under consideration, thus, his order may be set aside. 6. Per contra, the ld. Departmental representative (f…

SONU REALTORS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(3)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2892/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No. 2892 /Mum/2016 & Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Dcit – 14(3)(2) Plot No. 219, Laalasis, Mumbai 11Th Road, Chembur, Vs. Mumbai 400 071. Pan – Aaacs7073C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. J.P Bairagra Respondent By : Shri Rajat Mittal Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement :19.09.2018 O R D E R Per Ravish Sood, Jm The Present Appeals Filed By The Assessee For A.Y 2011-12 & A.Y 2012-13 Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(A)-22, Mumbai, Dated 22.01.2016 & 27.09.2016. As A Common Issue Is Involved In The Aforementioned Appeals, Thus, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Off Together By Way Of A Consolidate Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y 2011-12. The Assessee Assailing The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Has Raised Before Us The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: Shri. J.P BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(2)Section 22Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…Technologies India Ltd. Vs. DCIT-3(2), Mumbai (2017) 162 ITD 153 (Mum) Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-14(3)(2), Mumbai 5 ITA No. 2892/Mum/2016 & ITA No. 66/Mum/2017 A.Ys 2011-12 & 2012-13 (iii). ACIT, Circle-47(1), New Delhi Vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi (2012) 139 ITD 504 (Del) In the backdrop of his aforesaid contentions, it was submitted by the ld. A.R that as the CIT(A) had erred in concluding that the provisions of Sec. 23(1)(c) would not be applicable for determining the „annual value‟ of the property under consideration, thus, his order may be set aside. 6. Per contra, the ld. Departmental representative (f…

ITO 1(2)(3), MUMBAI vs. METAOXIIDE P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 4428/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri B.N. RaoFor Respondent: Shri Aarju Garodia
Section 23(1)(a)

…the relevant previous year, the assessee was entitled to get deduction of ALV under section 23(1)(c) of the Act. In support of such contention, the learned Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions:– i) ACIT v/s Dr. Prabha Sanghi, [2012] 139 ITD 504 (Del.); ii) Premsudha Exports Pvt. Ltd. v/s ACIT, [2007] 110 TTJ 89 (Mum.); and iii) Can Properties Pvt. Ltd. v/s ITO, M.A. no.323/Mum./2017 dated 26.12.2017. 8. We have heard rival submissions and perused material on record. Undisputedly, the flats in respect of which the Assessing Officer has determined the ALV under section 23(1)(a) remained v…

AMARLAL L. TELREJA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 7070/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Shri Amarlal L. Telreja, The Income Tax Officer, 8, Parmanand Chs, 19(1)(3), 2Nd Floor, 5Th Road, Khar, Room No. 319, Mumbai - 400052 Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai - 400012 Pan: Aabpt8608C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak JainFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…inclined to decide impugned disallowance u/s 14A and this ground of assessee’s appeal succeeds.” 7. Additions made u/s 23(1)(a) has been deleted by the co-ordinate Bench by following the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal passed in ACIT Vs. Prabha Sangi 139 ITD 504 and order of the co-ordinate Bench rendered in Premsudha Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 10 ITD 158. The relevant portion of the order reads as under: “Therefore, respectfully following the above, we are inclined to hold that the assessee’s case falls u/s 23(1)(c) and accordingly, the assessee is eligible for ‘vacancy allowance’ for the period during…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD., NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1576/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…ied on the decision in the case of Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT, 110 ITD 158. He also relied on the following decisions :- (i) Shakuntala Devi vs. DDIT, 31 CCH 32 (Bang.) (ii) Kamal Mishra vs. ITO, 19 SOT 251 (Del.) (iii) ACIT vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi, 139 ITD 504 (Del.) (iv) Vikas Keshav Garud vs. ITO, 160 ITD 7 (Pune-Trib.) (v) S.M. Chandrashekar vs. ITO, 76 taxman.com 278 (Bang.-Trib.) (vi) CIT vs. Joy Jacob, 151 ITR 19 (Kerala) 35. Ld. counsel further pointed out that the properties at Sl. Nos.12, 13 and 14 were merely farm lands, on which no residential unit has been constructed. Accordingly, annual…

THE ACIT.,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1254/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…ied on the decision in the case of Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT, 110 ITD 158. He also relied on the following decisions :- (i) Shakuntala Devi vs. DDIT, 31 CCH 32 (Bang.) (ii) Kamal Mishra vs. ITO, 19 SOT 251 (Del.) (iii) ACIT vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi, 139 ITD 504 (Del.) (iv) Vikas Keshav Garud vs. ITO, 160 ITD 7 (Pune-Trib.) (v) S.M. Chandrashekar vs. ITO, 76 taxman.com 278 (Bang.-Trib.) (vi) CIT vs. Joy Jacob, 151 ITR 19 (Kerala) 35. Ld. counsel further pointed out that the properties at Sl. Nos.12, 13 and 14 were merely farm lands, on which no residential unit has been constructed. Accordingly, annual…

ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1248/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…ied on the decision in the case of Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT, 110 ITD 158. He also relied on the following decisions :- (i) Shakuntala Devi vs. DDIT, 31 CCH 32 (Bang.) (ii) Kamal Mishra vs. ITO, 19 SOT 251 (Del.) (iii) ACIT vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi, 139 ITD 504 (Del.) (iv) Vikas Keshav Garud vs. ITO, 160 ITD 7 (Pune-Trib.) (v) S.M. Chandrashekar vs. ITO, 76 taxman.com 278 (Bang.-Trib.) (vi) CIT vs. Joy Jacob, 151 ITR 19 (Kerala) 35. Ld. counsel further pointed out that the properties at Sl. Nos.12, 13 and 14 were merely farm lands, on which no residential unit has been constructed. Accordingly, annual…

ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3193/DEL/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…ied on the decision in the case of Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT, 110 ITD 158. He also relied on the following decisions :- (i) Shakuntala Devi vs. DDIT, 31 CCH 32 (Bang.) (ii) Kamal Mishra vs. ITO, 19 SOT 251 (Del.) (iii) ACIT vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi, 139 ITD 504 (Del.) (iv) Vikas Keshav Garud vs. ITO, 160 ITD 7 (Pune-Trib.) (v) S.M. Chandrashekar vs. ITO, 76 taxman.com 278 (Bang.-Trib.) (vi) CIT vs. Joy Jacob, 151 ITR 19 (Kerala) 35. Ld. counsel further pointed out that the properties at Sl. Nos.12, 13 and 14 were merely farm lands, on which no residential unit has been constructed. Accordingly, annual…

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

Sonu Realtors Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT ( (139 ITD 504) — Cited in 21 Judgments | BharatTax