Treasure Island Resorts Private Limited v. DCIT

84 TTJ 820Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2004#16171 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Judgments citing Treasure Island Resorts Private Limited v. DCIT

ACIT 9(1), Mumbai vs. Aakash Lavlesh Leisure P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5339/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

Section 143(3)Section 147

…re is an implied warranty on the part of the assessee to refund the amount if the assessee is not able to provide promised services. The assessee relied on decision of the Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Treasure Island Resorts Private Limited v. DCIT (2004)84 TTJ 820(Hyd. Trib.) wherein the Tribunal accepted assessee’s method of recognizing revenue on spread over basis keeping in view that the scheme did not provided for refundability. The Tribunal relying on the earlier decision in the case of Meera and Ceiko Pump Private Limited [IT Appeal No. 652 (Hyd.) of 2001 dated 21-6-2002 for the assessment year 1994-9…

ACIT 9(1), Mumbai vs. Aakash Lavlesh Leisure P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5338/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

Section 143(3)Section 147

…re is an implied warranty on the part of the assessee to refund the amount if the assessee is not able to provide promised services. The assessee relied on decision of the Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Treasure Island Resorts Private Limited v. DCIT (2004)84 TTJ 820(Hyd. Trib.) wherein the Tribunal accepted assessee’s method of recognizing revenue on spread over basis keeping in view that the scheme did not provided for refundability. The Tribunal relying on the earlier decision in the case of Meera and Ceiko Pump Private Limited [IT Appeal No. 652 (Hyd.) of 2001 dated 21-6-2002 for the assessment year 1994-9…

ACIT 9(1), Mumbai vs. Aakash Lavlesh Leisure P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5337/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

Section 143(3)Section 147

…re is an implied warranty on the part of the assessee to refund the amount if the assessee is not able to provide promised services. The assessee relied on decision of the Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Treasure Island Resorts Private Limited v. DCIT (2004)84 TTJ 820(Hyd. Trib.) wherein the Tribunal accepted assessee’s method of recognizing revenue on spread over basis keeping in view that the scheme did not provided for refundability. The Tribunal relying on the earlier decision in the case of Meera and Ceiko Pump Private Limited [IT Appeal No. 652 (Hyd.) of 2001 dated 21-6-2002 for the assessment year 1994-9…

Addl CIT 9(1), Mumbai vs. Aakash Lavlesh Leisure P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 5316/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

Section 143(3)Section 147

…re is an implied warranty on the part of the assessee to refund the amount if the assessee is not able to provide promised services. The assessee relied on decision of the Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Treasure Island Resorts Private Limited v. DCIT (2004)84 TTJ 820(Hyd. Trib.) wherein the Tribunal accepted assessee’s method of recognizing revenue on spread over basis keeping in view that the scheme did not provided for refundability. The Tribunal relying on the earlier decision in the case of Meera and Ceiko Pump Private Limited [IT Appeal No. 652 (Hyd.) of 2001 dated 21-6-2002 for the assessment year 1994-9…

ITO 9(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Aakash Lavlesh Leisure (P) Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 8140/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

Section 143(3)Section 147

…re is an implied warranty on the part of the assessee to refund the amount if the assessee is not able to provide promised services. The assessee relied on decision of the Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Treasure Island Resorts Private Limited v. DCIT (2004)84 TTJ 820(Hyd. Trib.) wherein the Tribunal accepted assessee’s method of recognizing revenue on spread over basis keeping in view that the scheme did not provided for refundability. The Tribunal relying on the earlier decision in the case of Meera and Ceiko Pump Private Limited [IT Appeal No. 652 (Hyd.) of 2001 dated 21-6-2002 for the assessment year 1994-9…

Aakash Lavlesh Leisure P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 7905/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7905/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Aakash Lavlesh Leisure Ito -9(1)(1), बनाम/ Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan V. Juhu Club Millenium Mumbai-400020 A-1, Gulmohar Road Jvpd Scheme, Juhu Mumbai-400 049

Section 143(3)Section 147

…re is an implied warranty on the part of the assessee to refund the amount if the assessee is not able to provide promised services. The assessee relied on decision of the Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Treasure Island Resorts Private Limited v. DCIT (2004)84 TTJ 820(Hyd. Trib.) wherein the Tribunal accepted assessee’s method of recognizing revenue on spread over basis keeping in view that the scheme did not provided for refundability. The Tribunal relying on the earlier decision in the case of Meera and Ceiko Pump Private Limited [IT Appeal No. 652 (Hyd.) of 2001 dated 21-6-2002 for the assessment year 1994-9…

Treasure Island Resorts Private Limited v. DCIT (84 TTJ 820) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax