Search: house property

6 results for “house property”+ Section 54Gclear

Sorted by relevance

Chandigarh51 Delhi22 Bangalore17 Mumbai11 Jaipur7 Kolkata7 Chennai6 Pune6 Hyderabad6 Karnataka5 Ahmedabad3 SC2 Jodhpur2 Rajkot2 Cochin1 Nagpur1 Calcutta1 Raipur1 Agra1 Indore1

Key Topics

Section 54F37 Section 54B11 Exemption6 Deduction6 Long Term Capital Gains5 Disallowance4 Addition to Income4 Section 2(22)(e)3 Deemed Dividend3

LALITKUMAR KESARIMAL JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1345/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1345/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad

Section 2(22)(e)Section 54F

Section 54G(2) of the Act. In reference thereto, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Fibre Boards (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Banglore (2015) 62 taxmann.com 135 (SC) has held that “so long as the amount is utilized before the due date of filing return of income, the claim of exemption u/s.54G

KRUTI LALITKUMAR JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

LALITKUMAR KESARIMAL JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

KRUTI LALITKUMAR JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

LALITKUMAR KESARIMAL JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

KRUTI LALITKUMAR JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

PRANAY LALITKUMAR JAIN,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(3), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, PUNE vs. KALAWATI VIJAYKUMAR AGARWAL, PUNE

KALA ARVIND JAIN,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

BHANUDAS VITTHAL MHASURKAR,PUNE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), PUNE, PUNE