Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court Upholds Condonation of Delay & Deductions Under Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-17 New Delhi Versus sh. Akshay Sobti, Sh. Pradeep Sobti, Smt. Seema Sobti</h3> Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-17 New Delhi Versus sh. Akshay Sobti, Sh. Pradeep Sobti, Smt. Seema Sobti - [2020] 423 ITR 321 (Del) Issues Involved:1. Condonation of delay in re-filing applications.2. Deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.3. Deduction under Section 54EC of the Income Tax Act, 1961.4. Addition on account of suppression of maintenance charges under the head 'income from house property.'Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Condonation of Delay in Re-filing Applications:The court addressed the condonation of delay in re-filing applications for ITA 991/2019, ITA 992/2019, and ITA 996/2019. The delays of 39 days, 34 days, and 39 days respectively were condoned for reasons stated in the applications, and the applications were disposed of accordingly.2. Deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, emanated from ITAT orders dismissing the Revenue's appeals and upholding the CIT (A) orders allowing deductions under Section 54 and 54EC, consequently deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO). The case involved the sale of a property at Jor Bagh, New Delhi, and the subsequent investment in a new house property at 'Magnolias DLF Golf Links.' The AO disallowed the deduction under Section 54 on the grounds that the date of acquisition (10.02.2006) was beyond the one-year period provided under Section 54 and prior to the date of transfer. The CIT (A) held that the booking of the flat with the builder constituted construction of a new residential house, not purchase, and since construction was completed within three years of the sale of the original asset, the assessee was entitled to relief under Section 54. The ITAT upheld this view, and the High Court found no cogent ground to deny the benefit of Section 54, emphasizing the beneficial nature of the provision for assessees replacing the original long-term capital asset with a new one.3. Deduction under Section 54EC of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The AO made a disallowance of Rs. 50,00,000/- under Section 54EC, which was contested. The CIT (A) and ITAT relied on the judgment of the High Court of Madras in CIT vs. Coromandal Industries Ltd., which clarified that the restriction on investment in bonds of Rs. 50,00,000/- was effective from 01.04.2015 for AY 2015-16 and subsequent years. The High Court upheld this view, noting that the restriction did not apply to the assessment year in question and that the provision was intended to avoid litigation for previous years.4. Addition on Account of Suppression of Maintenance Charges under the Head 'Income from House Property':The AO made an addition of Rs. 14,07,474/- on account of suppression of maintenance charges received from rented property. The CIT (A) found that no maintenance charges were received by the appellant, as confirmed by the tenant and verifiable from the statement of account, TDS certificates, and Form 26AS. The ITAT upheld this finding, and the High Court noted that the presumption drawn by the AO was based on conjectures and surmises without proper inquiry, thus upholding the deletion of the addition.Conclusion:The High Court dismissed the appeals, finding no substantial question of law requiring consideration. The court upheld the factual findings of the lower tax authorities and ITAT, emphasizing the beneficial nature of the provisions under Sections 54 and 54EC for assessees replacing long-term capital assets. The court also found no merit in the Revenue's arguments regarding the suppression of maintenance charges.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found