“Section 2(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(4)13 judgments

MITTAL COTSPIN LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 950/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 950/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Mittal Cotspin Ltd., The Ito, St. No. 1, Opp. Govt. Primary Vs Ward 2(5), High School, Madhopouri, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aagcm7124G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca, Shri Aditya Sood, Ca & Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.02.2026

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA, Shri Aditya Sood, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH

DASA SHETTY KANTHA,BANGALORE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 6(3)(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

ITA 299/BANG/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Hari Pd. Nayak, ARFor Respondent: Shri N Balusamy, JCIT

Section 2(47)(v)Section 234A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL

DASA SHETTY KANTHA,BANGALORE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 3(2)(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

ITA 1926/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Hari Pd. Nayak, ARFor Respondent: Shri N Balusamy, JCIT

Section 2(47)(v)Section 234A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL

SHRI JAITESHWAR SEVA SANSTHAN,JODHPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 344/JODH/2025[NA]Status: FixedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025

Bench: Us By Challenging The Revisional Order.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(4)Section 2(5)Section 263

part of this definition of "a business" in the Excess Profits Tax Act is the same as the definition of a business in section 2(4) of the Indian Income-tax Act. Whether a particular activity amounts to any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure in the nature

SHREE RAM COLLOIDS PRIVATE LIMITED,JODHPUR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT(1), JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 344/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeshree Ram Colloids Private Vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax (1), Jodhpur C-79, Mia, Phase-Ii, Jodhpur- 342 005 Pan: Aakcs5803L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

SHANKAR SEWANI,NEW MARKET vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, AAYKAR BHAWAN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 25/IND/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Shankar Sewani, Dcit-1(1), 10 Kala Niketan, Bhopal New Market, Vs. T.T. Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Adkps6959H Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.07.2024 O R D E R

Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 234BSection 3

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY

BHANUPRASAD MAGANLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 7/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 54F

whether the transaction was an adventure in the nature of trade is a mixed question of law and fact, it held that when Section 2(4) of the 1922 Act referred to an adventure in the nature of trade, it clearly suggested that the transaction in question cannot properly

SAFAL HOSPITALITY AND MAINTANANCE SERVICE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 76/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Khandhar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(24)Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 438

76/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No. Safal Hospitality and Maintainance Service vs. DCIT Now, coming to ESIC Act, wherein contribution is defined under section 2(4) of the ESIC ACT 1948 as the sum of money payable to the Corporation by the principal employer in respect of an employee

SHRI BHADRESH RAMNIKLAL NAGDA,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1), JAMNAGAR

In the result, ground number 2 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 254/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 56

clauses (a) and (b) of section 5612rviu of the Act are not attracted Clause (c) talks of am property other than immovable property Section 2(4) of the Act defines 'capital asset' to mean property of any kind held by assessee whether or not connected with his business or profession ... against assessee. Even otherwise, the land held by assessee was agricultural land which is not capital asset as clearly defined under section 2(4) of the Act, which excludes agricultural land out of definition of capital asset'. The asset owned be assessee is not capital asset, hence clause

MEENU ARYA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO,WARD-3(4), HAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 85/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargmeenu Arya, Vs. Ito, Ch. No. 206-207, Ansal Satyam Ward-3(4), Rdc, Rajnagar, Ghaziabad Hapur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Abcpa7903P

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 2(14)Section 45Section 54Section 548Section 54B

that where the assessee has throughout maintained that the land in question was land falling within the definition of ‘agricultural land’ given in section 2(4)(iii) of the Act. The fact that the appellant/ assessee intended to use the land for industrial purpose did not in any way alter

KALUBHAI DULABHAI GOLAVIYA,SURAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, , SURAT

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 619/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A No.15 & Ita No.619/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 &2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Kalubhai Dulabhai Golaviya Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, B/1-2, Jalaram Society, B/H. Central Circle-2, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Gurunagar Society, Varachha Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Road, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp 5116 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwin K Parekh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B.Koli, CIT-DR &

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 45(3)Section 54F

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकर अपीलसं./IT

MAMTA LALIT JAIN,THANE vs. ITO WD 1(2) , KALYAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1626/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Section 131Section 147

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ACIT 28 (2), NAVI MUMBAI vs. M/S NEEL SIDDHI DEVELOPERS, NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 30/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.30/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) The Assistant Commissioner M/S Neel Siddhi Developers 2Nd Floor, The Emerald Plot No. Of Income Tax 28(2), 195/B, Sec-12, Vashi, Navi Mumbai बिधम/ Mumbai- 400 703 Room No.307, 3Rd Floor, Tower Vs. No.6, Vashi Railway Station Complex, Navi Mumbai- 400 703 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aagfn2744N (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Ms. Ritika AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri. Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. AR

Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं