“Section 28(5)”

Section References (mined)Section 28Section 28(5)4 judgments

ALICE ARUN,CHENGANNUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 305/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 28Section 28(5)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 45S

capital account. The case of the assessee is Page 4 of 7 that the said interest income is a business income as per section 28(5) of the Act and therefore the interest paid by the assessee to the various public is eligible for deduction

VAIDYA SRIKANTAPPA SADASHIVAIAH SRIKANTH,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE- 1, , BANGALORE

ITA 200/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Ravi Shankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 45(5)Section 54

KIAD Act i.e. from 30-3-2004, the land in question vested in the State free from all encumbrances by operation of Section 28(5) of the KIAD Act, whereas the land acquired under the said Act vests only under Section 16 thereof, which runs as under: ‘16.Power to take

TEJRAJ DALICHAND JAIN,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 560/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2018-19 Tejraj Dalichand Jain National Faceless Flat No. 14, Nakshtra, Assessment Centre Vs. Chandavarkar Road, Ito 25(2)(2) Borivali (West)- 400092. Bkc, Mumbai. Pan: Aabpj3476C (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, A.R. Revenue By : Shri P.D. Chougule, (Addl. Cit), Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 21 . 05 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29 . 05 . 2024 O R D E R Per: Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit Appeal Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (“Act” In Short) Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059124020(1) Dated 28.12.2023 For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Following Grounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised: “The Following Grounds Of Appeal Are Independent Of & Without Prejudice To, One Another-

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule, (Addl. CIT), Sr. D.R

Section 250Section 271BSection 28Section 28(5)Section 44A

Appeal, this appeal has been preferred. During the course of hearing before us, the appellant referred to the deeming provision of section 28(5) of the Income Tax Act and stated that he was not carrying on any income from business or profession and has only received interest from

M/S. HANUMANTHAPPA CHANDRASHEKAR,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1223/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 46Section 96