← All Phrases

“Section 160(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 160Section 160(2)6 judgments

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

ITA 3936/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 11Section 126Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 2(15)Section 3

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

ITA 3795/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 2(15)

incurred by CIDCO, whether revenue or capital, are on behalf of the Government of Maharashtra and are reimbursed to it. xiv) As per section 160(2) of the MRTP Act, all liabilities which are enforceable against the Development Authority shall be enforceable against the State Government. 3.1 In the light ... provision in the MMRDA Act stating that all liabilities against the assessee shall be enforceable against the State Government. In fact, section 160(2) of the MRTP Act, pointed out in case of CIDCO, mentions that the aforesaid clause shall be effective from the date of dissolution of the Development

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2016-17

ITA 3794/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 2(15)

incurred by CIDCO, whether revenue or capital, are on behalf of the Government of Maharashtra and are reimbursed to it. xiv) As per section 160(2) of the MRTP Act, all liabilities which are enforceable against the Development Authority shall be enforceable against the State Government. 3.1 In the light ... provision in the MMRDA Act stating that all liabilities against the assessee shall be enforceable against the State Government. In fact, section 160(2) of the MRTP Act, pointed out in case of CIDCO, mentions that the aforesaid clause shall be effective from the date of dissolution of the Development

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MUMBAI

ITA 3791/MUM/2023[2018 19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 11Section 126Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 2(15)Section 3

incurred by CIDCO, whether revenue or capital, are on behalf of the Government of Maharashtra and are reimbursed to it. xiv) As per section 160(2) of the MRTP Act, all liabilities which are enforceable against the Development Authority shall be enforceable against the State Government. 3.1 In the light ... provision in the MMRDA Act stating that all liabilities against the assessee shall be enforceable against the State Government. In fact, section 160(2) of the MRTP Act, pointed out in case of CIDCO, mentions that the aforesaid clause shall be effective from the date of dissolution of the Development

GULAB GRANDSONS FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. ITO, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 353/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 139Section 139(9)Section 164(1)Section 164(3)Section 44A

Reference may be made to second proviso to section 164 read with clause (iv) sub-section 1 of section 162 and section 160(2) of the Act which provide that the representative assessee /trustee is to be assessed in the same manner as that of the beneficiary. Therefore the decisions

MANISH TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5548/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Manish Tyagi, Vs. Ito, House No. 131, Sector-6, Ward-1(4), Chiranjeev Vihar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Pan: Acgpt1413J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Prem Late Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Dudeja, Sr. DR
Section 160Section 160(1)(i)Section 161(1)Section 163Section 2(14)Section 48Section 54F

earned income in India through Shri Manish Tyagi, the assessee. Hence, Shri Manish Tyagi shall be deemed to be an assessee as per section 160(2) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, Assessing Officer framed the assessment of the assessee in his individual capacity also adding long term capital gain ... representative assessee means the agent of a nonresident, including a person who is treated as an agent u/s 163. By virtue of section 160(2) a representative assessee is deemed to be an assessee. b) Section 161(1), in defining the liability of a representative assessee, makes him subject

Section 160(2) — 6 judgments | BharatTax | BharatTax