“Section 24(1)(a)”

Section References (mined)Section 24Section 24(1)(a)6 judgments

THE ITO, KOCHI vs. M/S.REALITY PROJECTS AND ENTERTAINMENTS P. LTD, PUDUCHERRY

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 116/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhito, Corporate Ward 2(2) Reality Projects & 5Th Floor, C.R. Building Entertainments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. I.S. Press Road, Kochi 682018 17, Kamaraj Salai [Pan: Aadcr1354A] Puducherry 605011 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------ None ------For Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(v)Section 226(3)Section 28Section 46ASection 53A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh

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

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

provisions of LA Act, 1894 and not under any other Central or State\nenactment. Further, it has been held as under:\n“11. Section 24(1) begins with a non-obstante clause and covers situations\nwhere either no award has been made under the Land Acquisition Act, in\nwhich case ... acquisition proceedings shall continue under\nthe provisions of the Land Acquisition Act as if the said Act had not been\nrepealed.\n12. To Section 24(1)(b) an important exception is carved out by Section\n24(2). The necessary ingredients of Section 24(2) are as follows:\n(a)\nSection

JK INVESTMENT ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2013/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhjk Investment Vs. Dcit-20(2) 202-B, Shreeji Shopping Mumbai. Arcade, M. G. Road, Borivali (East) Mumbai-400066 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aagfj3757K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Shri. Prakash Kishinchandani

Section 143(2)Section 24(1)(a)Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JK Investment Vs. DCIT-20

DCIT 27(1) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. GANGA DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

ITA 2328/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shripavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Dcit 27(1) R No.406, 4Th Floor, Tower M/S Ganga Developers Plot No. 219, Alal Asia, No.6, 11Th Road, Chembur, Vashi Railway Stn Complex, Vs. Vashi, Navi Mumbai Mumbai-400 071 Mumbai-400 703 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaafg 8230 C Assessee By : Shri J.P. Bairagra, Ar Revenue By : Shri Jasbir Chouhan, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan, DR

Section 10(37)Section 11Section 143(3)Section 96

noted above leaves no doubt that the appellant's case has been categorized by the Authority as falling within the ambit of section 24(1)(a) of the Act. The implication of the process adopted by the Civic Authority in declaring the above award is that while the procedure laid ... provisions of section 24 of the Act make it clear that only in respect of cases falling under clause (b) of section 24(1), the proceedings under the Act of 1894 are to continue as if the old Act has not been repealed. In all other cases where the process

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

provisions of LA Act, 1894 and not under any other Central or State enactment. Further, it has been held as under: “11. Section 24(1) begins with a non-obstante clause and covers situations where either no award has been made under the Land Acquisition Act, in which case ... acquisition proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act as if the said Act had not been repealed. 12. To Section 24(1)(b) an important exception is carved out by Section 24(2). The necessary ingredients of Section 24(2) are as follows: (a) Section 24

THE JOINT LESSEES OF INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,,MUMBAI vs. ITO 20 (2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the assessee appeal is allowed

ITA 2797/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalethe Joint Lessees Of Vs. Ito – 20(2)(1), Industrial Estate, Piramal Chambers, 1St Floor, Estate Bldg Ii Floor,Lalbaug, Lalbaug Industrial Mumbai – 400012 Estate, Dr B.A. Road, Mumbai – 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaaj7202Q Appellant .. Respondent Ito – 20(2)(1) Vs. The Joint Lessees Of Piramal Chambers, Industrial Estate, Ii Floor,Lalbaug, 1St Floor, Estate Bldg Mumbai – 400012 Lalbaug Industrial Estate, Dr B.A.Road, Mumbai – 400012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaaj7202Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant /Respondent By Shri G.P Mehta.Ar : Respondent/Appellant By Shri T. Shankar.Dr : Date Of Hearing 11.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2022 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153Section 24(1)(a)Section 50C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL