T.M.P.N. Murugesan v. Commissioner of Income-tax

217 Taxmann 40High Court#15381 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2019.

Judgments citing T.M.P.N. Murugesan v. Commissioner of Income-tax

SRINIVASA REDDY RAJASEKAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 10(5), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1132/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1132 /Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 50C

…as filed before ld. CIT(A) challenging the addition u/s. 50C of the Act. It is contested before the ld. CIT(A) that the AO had valued the building by adopting CPWD rates as against state PWED rates. Placed reliance on the decision of TMPN Murugesan vs. CIT 217 Taxmann 40 (Mad) and CIT vs. V. Gajalakshmi [2011] 331 Taxmann 216 (Mad). Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused material available on record. The only issue in the present appeal relates to the addition u/s. 50C of the Act. It is a matter of record that when the appel…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MADURAI vs. THEVANESAM ERUDHAYA AMMAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 231/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Dr. M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Ms. K. Hemalatha, CA
Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 69B

…WD rate alone should be adopted in arriving at the cost of construction, the Tribunal was justified in adopting the valuation of the State P.W.D. rates for the purpose of determining the cost of construction. T.M.P.N. Murugesan vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, 217 Taxmann 40, relied on.” 7. By following the above judgements of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, the ld. CIT(A) has revised the cost of construction. The ld. DR could not controvert the above decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. Thus, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly, the ground…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MADURAI vs. THEVANESAM ERUDHAYA AMMAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 230/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Dr. M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Ms. K. Hemalatha, CA
Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 69B

…WD rate alone should be adopted in arriving at the cost of construction, the Tribunal was justified in adopting the valuation of the State P.W.D. rates for the purpose of determining the cost of construction. T.M.P.N. Murugesan vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, 217 Taxmann 40, relied on.” 7. By following the above judgements of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, the ld. CIT(A) has revised the cost of construction. The ld. DR could not controvert the above decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. Thus, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly, the ground…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MADURAI vs. THEVANESAM ERUDHAYA AMMAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 229/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Dr. M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Ms. K. Hemalatha, CA
Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 69B

…WD rate alone should be adopted in arriving at the cost of construction, the Tribunal was justified in adopting the valuation of the State P.W.D. rates for the purpose of determining the cost of construction. T.M.P.N. Murugesan vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, 217 Taxmann 40, relied on.” 7. By following the above judgements of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, the ld. CIT(A) has revised the cost of construction. The ld. DR could not controvert the above decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. Thus, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly, the ground…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MADURAI vs. THEVANESAM ERUDHAYA AMMAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, TUTICORIN

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 228/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Dr. M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Ms. K. Hemalatha, CA
Section 12ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 69B

…WD rate alone should be adopted in arriving at the cost of construction, the Tribunal was justified in adopting the valuation of the State P.W.D. rates for the purpose of determining the cost of construction. T.M.P.N. Murugesan vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, 217 Taxmann 40, relied on.” 7. By following the above judgements of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, the ld. CIT(A) has revised the cost of construction. The ld. DR could not controvert the above decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. Thus, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly, the ground…

ACIT, MADURAI vs. S.JAYARAMAN, MADURAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1073/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1073/Chny/2017 $नधा!रण वष! /Assessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr.T.Vasudevan, Adv

…Officer to adopt the rate which is prevalent to distant places and metropolitan cities. For this purpose, the Hon’ble High ITA No.1073/Chny/2017 & CO No.110/Chny/2017 :- 6 -: Court had relied upon the decision in the case of T.M.P.N. Murugasen reported in 217 Taxmann 40. Admittedly, for Madurai, PWD rates are specifically available and therefore, Madurai cannot be compared to a Metropolitan City for the purpose of applying PWD rates. Admittedly, the Ld.CIT(A) is also not a Valuation Officer competent for doing valuation by applying PWD rates. Consequently, modifying the CPWD rates valuation has done by the D…

T.M.P.N. Murugesan v. Commissioner of Income-tax (217 Taxmann 40) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax