Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.83 seconds)
Documents citing Acit, Cir.-4,, Pune vs Parmar Properties Pvt. Ltd.,, Pune on 8 November, 2017

Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax , ... vs Kohinoor Hatcheries Private Limited, ... on 3 May, 2019

In the case of Binjusaria Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra), the Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal has observed that wherein assessee fulfilled its part of obligation under development agreement, developer has not done anything to discharge obligations cast on it under develop agreement, capital gains cannot be brought to tax in the year under appeal, merely on basis of signing of development agreement during impugned year. In the present case, the developer has not discharged his obligation as per the agreement, therefore taxking the capital gains is not justified. The above decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 21 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Road Infrastructure Development ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 31 July, 2020

Further, reliance was placed on the Coordinate Bench decision in case of M/s Parvar Enterprises, Pune vs. ACIT (in ITA No. 1058 & 673/PUN/2016 dated 8.09.2017). Regarding the observation of the Assessing Officer that the draft red herring prospectus is an extremely vital document and has provided enduring benefit to the assessee company, it was submitted that the Draft Red Herring Prospectus is the first requirement of the SEBI and the Companies Act, which is to be filed with the Authorities, which contains certain information in a prescribed format as required by Law before any company intends to go for Public Offer. It also contains the prospective use of public issue money and is more of a historical data of the past performance of the company and the future plan of the company, which requires the subscription through the Public Offer. It was submitted that by no stretch of imagination any document which contains past history and future use of the proceeds is of enduring benefit is beyond any logic as soon as the decision of the competent authority of the Board resolved to abort the public offer, this Draft Red Herring Prospectus becomes totally useless and legally unenforceable and cannot be considered for endeavoring benefit rather it is waste paper. In view of above, the conclusion of Ld. AO that it has an endeavoring benefit is not far from the truth but is just imagination of the Ld. AO that this will have some enduring benefit in times to come without raising the funds from the market. The AO has also observed that earlier it has taken 41 ITA No. 668 to 670/JP/2019 M/s Road Infrastructure Dev. Com.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 81 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Kewal Real Estate Developers Pvt. ... vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... on 12 January, 2018

The judgments of Apoorva Properties and Estate Pvt. Ltd., Brahma Associates Vs. JCIT, DCIT Vs. Brigade Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Saroj Sales Organization Vs. ITO, Vandana Properties Vs. ACIT support the above claim. The clarification issued by the CBDT referred to above and relied upon by the appellant also supports the above view.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Panji Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Exim India Oil Company Ltd, Cuttack vs Dcit, Cuttack on 10 May, 2021

11. From the above satisfaction note, it is clearly discernible that initiation of reassessment proceedings has been made by the AO by alleging that the return was processed u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act but while processing, the assessee has not computed the income as per the provisions of section 115JB of the Act and paid tax accordingly. Therefore, prima facie, adjustment of Rs.48,53,607/- u/s.115 JB and charged tax accordingly. Being aggrieved by this, the assessee preferred appeal and the ld CIT(A) P a g e 7 | 12 ITA N o.57 /CTK/2 00 8 Assessmen t Ye ar : 200 1-02 has deleted the addition due to procedural mistake and also appreciated the escapement of income and loss of revenue and observed that "however, the suitable course of action available to the assessee under the Act is application of provisions of section 147 of the I.T.Act as the appellant has understated its income but not applying the provisions of section 115JB of the I.T.Act. It is ample clear that there was no fresh or new tangible material before the AO which was not before him during processing of return u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act. We are in agreement with the contention of ld CIT DR that in this case, the direction issued by ld CIT (A) while deleting the addition and on procedural mistake, he has directed the AO to take suitable course available to him u/s.147 of the Act. Therefore, the limitation as prescribed u/s.149 of the Act for initiation of proceedings u/s.147 of the Act and issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act does not apply but it is not the case of the appellant/assessee in the present appeal that the initiation of reassessment proceedings is time barred. Therefore, the proposition rendered by ITAT Delhi in the case of Hanemp Properties Pvt Ltd (supra) does not provide any fruitful support of the revenue in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the legal contention and grounds of the assessee in the present case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Cuttack Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Joonktollee Tea & Industries Ltd., ... vs Dcit, Circle - 4(1), Kolkata, Kolkata on 18 May, 2018

He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of M/s Russells Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 109 ITR 229 (Cal) wherein it is held that, when the assessing officer had merely followed the decision of the Appellate Tribunal and when the CIT had not pointed out that there were any materials before the Income Tax Officer, not to follow the decision of the Tribunal, the order of the ITO cannot, therefore, be said to be erroneous and hence the proposed exercise of the power of revision u/s 263 of the Act was illegal and without jurisdiction.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Khinvasara Chavan,Pune vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 30 March, 2026

6. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. So far as the first issue is concerned i.e. deemed income from the house property on account of unsold flats, we find the issue stands decided in favour of the assessee by a number of decisions. We find the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Pride and Expert Properties Private Limited vs. ACIT vide ITA No.860/PUN/2022 order dated 14.02.2023 for assessment year 2017-18 has decided the issue in favour of the assessee by observing as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1