Section 2(13) — 80 judgments | BharatTax

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 104/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

construction of warehouse, hence, the intention/object with which the AOP was formed was to do business. The term business is defined under section 2(13) of the Act, which talks about adventure or concern in the nature of trade. When the main object of the Appellant is to establish warehouse ... storage of agricultural produce, it clearly falls under section 2(13) of the Act, and hence, it has to be treated as business of the Appellant. I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/202 1 Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2017-18 2 6.2. The AO has rejected the claim of deduction made under

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1),FEROZEPUR, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

construction of warehouse, hence, the intention/object with which the AOP was formed was to do business. The term business is defined under section 2(13) of the Act, which talks about adventure or concern in the nature of trade. When the main object of the Appellant is to establish warehouse ... storage of agricultural produce, it clearly falls under section 2(13) of the Act, and hence, it has to be treated as business of the Appellant. I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/202 1 Assessment Years: 2014-15 and 2017-18 2 6.2. The AO has rejected the claim of deduction made under

LIFESTYLE AND MEDIA HOLDINGS LIMITED,DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 18(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3714/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.3714/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Lifestyle & Media Holding Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known As Ndtv Vs. C.R. Building, Lifestyle Holdings Limited) New Delhi. Plot No.09, Unit No. 055, Ground Floor Capia, Corporate Suites, Jasola, New Delhi-110025. Pan-Aadcn3076F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri R.P. Mall, Adv. Assessee By Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/12/2025 O R D E R [ Per Bench: All The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Delhi [Ld. Cit(A)] For Ay 2014-15 To 1016017 & Having Common Issues, Therefore, They Are Dispose- Off By A Common Order. First, We Taken Assessee Appeal For Ay 2014-15 In Ita No. 64/Del/2019. Ita No.3714/Del/2024 & Lifestyle & Media Holdings Limited Vs. Dci

Section 143(3)Section 2(13)Section 71

erred in contending that activities of holding investments do not qualify f business as defined in section 2(13) of the Act. Further the Hon'ble CIT(A) too has erred in affirming the view of the Ld. AO 2.2 That on the facts and circumstances of the case ... instead of earning dividend income. It was also noted that no business has been carried out by the assessee within the meaning of section 2(13) and there was no income which was chargeable under the head 'Profits and gains of business of profession'. The AO further noted that holding

LIFESTYLE AND MEDIA HOLDING LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-18(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 255/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.3714/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Lifestyle & Media Holding Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known As Ndtv Vs. C.R. Building, Lifestyle Holdings Limited) New Delhi. Plot No.09, Unit No. 055, Ground Floor Capia, Corporate Suites, Jasola, New Delhi-110025. Pan-Aadcn3076F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri R.P. Mall, Adv. Assessee By Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/12/2025 O R D E R [ Per Bench: All The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Delhi [Ld. Cit(A)] For Ay 2014-15 To 1016017 & Having Common Issues, Therefore, They Are Dispose- Off By A Common Order. First, We Taken Assessee Appeal For Ay 2014-15 In Ita No. 64/Del/2019. Ita No.3714/Del/2024 & Lifestyle & Media Holdings Limited Vs. Dci

Section 143(3)Section 2(13)Section 71

erred in contending that activities of holding investments do not qualify f business as defined in section 2(13) of the Act. Further the Hon'ble CIT(A) too has erred in affirming the view of the Ld. AO 2.2 That on the facts and circumstances of the case ... instead of earning dividend income. It was also noted that no business has been carried out by the assessee within the meaning of section 2(13) and there was no income which was chargeable under the head 'Profits and gains of business of profession'. The AO further noted that holding

LIFESTYLE AND MEDIA HOLDING LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-18(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 64/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.3714/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Dy. Commissioner Of Lifestyle & Media Holding Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known As Ndtv Vs. C.R. Building, Lifestyle Holdings Limited) New Delhi. Plot No.09, Unit No. 055, Ground Floor Capia, Corporate Suites, Jasola, New Delhi-110025. Pan-Aadcn3076F (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri R.P. Mall, Adv. Assessee By Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/12/2025 O R D E R [ Per Bench: All The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Delhi [Ld. Cit(A)] For Ay 2014-15 To 1016017 & Having Common Issues, Therefore, They Are Dispose- Off By A Common Order. First, We Taken Assessee Appeal For Ay 2014-15 In Ita No. 64/Del/2019. Ita No.3714/Del/2024 & Lifestyle & Media Holdings Limited Vs. Dci

Section 143(3)Section 2(13)Section 71

erred in contending that activities of holding investments do not qualify f business as defined in section 2(13) of the Act. Further the Hon'ble CIT(A) too has erred in affirming the view of the Ld. AO 2.2 That on the facts and circumstances of the case ... instead of earning dividend income. It was also noted that no business has been carried out by the assessee within the meaning of section 2(13) and there was no income which was chargeable under the head 'Profits and gains of business of profession'. The AO further noted that holding

HARISH BANGA,HISAR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the substantial ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 4893/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year: 2018-19 (Physical Hearing) Harish Banga, Assessment Unit, 264, Bank Colony, Hisar, Vs. Faceless Assessment Unit Haryana – 125001. Income Tax Department, Pan – Abqpb 8845 F New Delhi-110001. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri H.K. Batra, Ca & Shri Naman Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Shri Virender Kumar Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.12 .2025 O R D E R Per : Pawan Singh: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Cit (A) Dated 08.07.2025 Vide Assessment Year 2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri H.K. Batra, CA &For Respondent: Shri Virender Kumar Singh, SR. D.R

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 56Section 57

Appellant was engaged in the systematic and organized activity of earning referral commissions through MLM schemes, which constitutes a business activity as per section 2(13) of the Act, as held in CIT v. P.V. Subba Rao (1988) 173 ITR 295 (AP). 3.3 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying

HARKRISHEN SINGH TULI,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3),, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 786/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 784, 785 & 786/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2012-13, 2017-18 & 2020-21 Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Vs The Ito, #359, Sector 9-D, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "ायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afrpt6944G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Assessee Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(13)Section 37Section 44ASection 56(1)

company/firm, once they were withdrawn and invested in personal Fixed Deposits to earn interest, the character of the income is that of "Interest. Section 2(13) of the Act defines "business" as involving trade, commerce, or manufacture. Passive earning of interest on Fixed Deposits, specifically when held by an individual

HARKRISHEN SINGH TULI,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 785/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 784, 785 & 786/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2012-13, 2017-18 & 2020-21 Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Vs The Ito, #359, Sector 9-D, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "ायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afrpt6944G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Assessee Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(13)Section 37Section 44ASection 56(1)

company/firm, once they were withdrawn and invested in personal Fixed Deposits to earn interest, the character of the income is that of "Interest. Section 2(13) of the Act defines "business" as involving trade, commerce, or manufacture. Passive earning of interest on Fixed Deposits, specifically when held by an individual

HARKRISHEN SINGH TULI,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 784/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 784, 785 & 786/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / A.Y. : 2012-13, 2017-18 & 2020-21 Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Vs The Ito, #359, Sector 9-D, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "ायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Afrpt6944G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, Assessee Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Harkrishen Singh Tuli, AssesseeFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(13)Section 37Section 44ASection 56(1)

company/firm, once they were withdrawn and invested in personal Fixed Deposits to earn interest, the character of the income is that of "Interest. Section 2(13) of the Act defines "business" as involving trade, commerce, or manufacture. Passive earning of interest on Fixed Deposits, specifically when held by an individual

FEDERATION OF EUROPEAN BUSINESS IN INDIA,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 2446/DEL/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishrafederation Of European Commissioner Of Income Business In India, Tax (Exemption), Aiwan-E-Ghalib Complex, Vs. E-2, Civic Centre, Mata Sundari Lane, Minto Road, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110002 Pan: Aafcf5934N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Amol Sinha, Advocate Sh. Ankit Kumar, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Jitender Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 15/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/12/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.03.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), New Delhi [‘Cit(E)’].

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)Section 8

relation to any trade, commerce or business. We will analyse the term “business” from the definition of the term ‘business’ as defined in section 2(13) of the act and whether assessee’s activities falls within the terminology of “business”. The term “Business” read as under: - …” [Emphasis supplied] 12 Federation

DCIT, CIRCLE -3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

ITA 314/VIZ/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: 1.Shri Karnjot Singh KhuranaFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

assessable as business receipts/operational income and not as income from house property. Emphasizing on the fact that the term “business” as defined in Section 2(13) of the Act included any trade, commerce, or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture, the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

ITA 206/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: 1.Shri Karnjot Singh KhuranaFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

assessable as business receipts/operational income and not as income from house property. Emphasizing on the fact that the term “business” as defined in Section 2(13) of the Act included any trade, commerce, or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture, the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 205/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.314/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2014-15) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Nord Anglia Education Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) Infrastructure Private Limited, Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aabcv2255L (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee By: 1.Shri Karnjot Singh Khurana, Advocate, 2. Shri Snehal Rajan Shukla, Advocate, 3. Shri Avar Lamba, Advocate. राजस्व द्वारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.205/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Nord Anglia Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) Education Infrastructure Private Limited, Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aabcv2255L (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee By: 1. Shri Karnjot Singh Khurana, Advocate, 2. Shri Snehal Rajan Shukla, Advocate, 3. Shri Avar Lamba, Advocate. राजस्व द्वारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr 2

For Appellant: 1.Shri Karnjot Singh KhuranaFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

assessable as business receipts/operational income and not as income from house property. Emphasizing on the fact that the term “business” as defined in Section 2(13) of the Act included any trade, commerce, or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture, the assessee

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE COIMBATORE CITY TAMILNADU POLICE CANTEEN,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, NCW-1(1), COIMBATORE

ITA 2069/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri. V. Swaminathan, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 274Section 44Section 44A

getting its accounts audited for the purposes of GST and was submitting audit report and GSTR9C The term business is defined in Section 2(13) of the Act as under. "Business includes any trade commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture ... received, even it is without any profit margin it is well covered within the wide import of the term 'Business' as defined in Section 2(13) of the Act. 7. Assessing officer has rightfully levied Penalty u/s 271B of the Act in case of assessee carrying an business with turnover

PREMA KUMARI,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 89/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)

Section 2(13)Section 2(14)

amounted to business activity carried out with the intention to earn profit, tantamount to adventure in the nature of trade as defined in Section 2(13) of the Act. Section 2(13) of the Act states that — "business" includes any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern

PREMA KUMARI ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(3)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 75/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT (DR)

Section 2(13)Section 2(14)

amounted to business activity carried out with the intention to earn profit, tantamount to adventure in the nature of trade as defined in Section 2(13) of the Act. Section 2(13) of the Act states that — "business" includes any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern

INCLINE REALTY PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(1), MUMBAI

ITA 112/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda Matkari

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)

aforesaid activity in a systematic manner and the same would qualify as adventure in the nature of ‘business’ as defined in Section 2(13) of the Act. The Assessee was not seeking to earn gains on appreciation of the value of the investment. To the contrary, the intention

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

ITA 1035/SRT/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jun 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1035-1038/Srt/2024 (Ays: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Chanchalben Dahyabhai Patel Income Tax Officer, Ward-Daman, 40, A.Dabhel Ghelwad Faila, Vs. Jeevanji Hotel Building, Kathiria, Nani, Daman-396 210 Devka Road, Nani Daman-396 210 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aljpp 3816 D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Chandra Jha, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 26/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement | 09/06/2025 आदेश / Order Per Bijayananda Pruseth, Am: These Four Appeals By The Assessee Emanate From Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, 'The Act') By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short, “Nfac/Cit(E)”] All Dated 13.08.2024, For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16, Which In Turn Arose Out Of Assessment Orders Passed By Assessing Officer (In Short, ‘Ao') U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S.144B Of The Act On 26.12.2018, 25.03.2022 & 28.03.2022 Respectively. In All The Appeals, The Facts Are Common & Grounds Of Appeals Raised By The Assessee Are Similar Except Variance Of Amounts. Hence, With The Consent Of The Parties, All The Appeals Were Clubbed & Heard Together & Are Decided By This Consolidated Order For Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

Section 147Section 250

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

BINDUMALYAM PANDURANGA ALLANHARINARAYAN ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

ITA 107/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Bharadwaj Sheshadri, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 23Section 250Section 44A

ITA No.107/Bang/2025 Bindumalyam Panduranga Allanharinarayan, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A"BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3819/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vipula Joshi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT DR

Section 11Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 2(15)Section 40

common parlance. The word 'trade' would mean exchange of goods for goods or for money. The word 'business', though, has been defined under section 2(13) of the Act, however, is generic. 'Business' in its ordinary sense would mean an occupation, or profession which occupies time, attention or labour

“Section 2(13)”

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1),FEROZEPUR, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

LIFESTYLE AND MEDIA HOLDINGS LIMITED,DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 18(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

LIFESTYLE AND MEDIA HOLDING LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-18(1), NEW DELHI

LIFESTYLE AND MEDIA HOLDING LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-18(1), NEW DELHI

HARISH BANGA,HISAR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NEW DELHI

HARKRISHEN SINGH TULI,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3),, CHANDIGARH

HARKRISHEN SINGH TULI,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), CHANDIGARH

HARKRISHEN SINGH TULI,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), CHANDIGARH

FEDERATION OF EUROPEAN BUSINESS IN INDIA,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

DCIT, CIRCLE -3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE COIMBATORE CITY TAMILNADU POLICE CANTEEN,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, NCW-1(1), COIMBATORE

PREMA KUMARI,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

PREMA KUMARI ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(3)(1), BANGALORE

INCLINE REALTY PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(1), MUMBAI

CHANCHALBEN DAHYABHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMAN

BINDUMALYAM PANDURANGA ALLANHARINARAYAN ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI RAILWAY VIKAS CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI