Search: house property

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1722/HYD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1723/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

Section 25l

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1724/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

Section 25l

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1725/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

Section 25l

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made

KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,WARANGAL vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1726/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

Section 25l

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , WARANGAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1877/HYD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

Section 25l

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1878/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

Section 25l

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, WARANGAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1879/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

Section 25l

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, WARANGAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1880/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

Section 25l

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD vs. KAKATIYA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, WARANGAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1881/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri Jeevanlal Lavidiya –

Section 25l

25l{l){a) of the LT.Act. (ii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of expenditure of the assessee of Rs.2,79,09,099/-in respect of development charges after verifying whether the same have been incurred out of the development charges received by the assessee, without appreciating the fact that the expenditure is made