325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore v. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF)

393 ITR 175High Court2017#14138 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Judgments citing 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore v. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF)

Shiva Corporation (India) Limited, Jaipur vs. Dy. CIT, CC-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1219/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Aug 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr.-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(14)

…ourt, wherein it was held that certification from the Revenue Authorities needs to be given weightage unless something contrary is bought on records, Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore vs. K.R.N. Prabhakaran (HUF) [2016] 73 taxmann.com 305 (Madras)/[2017] 393 ITR 175 (Madras)[17-08-2016] Section 2(14) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Capital assets (Agricultural land) -Assessment year 2008-09 Assessee claimed exemption in respect of agricultural land sold by it during relevant assessment year on ground that same was situated beyond 8 kms of 15 ITA No. 1219/JPR/2024 Shiva Corporation (India) Ltd.…

Kulwant Singh, Mohali vs. ITO, W-6(5), Mohali

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 395/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sharma, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 2(14)Section 54B

…le Courts that the certificate by the officials of the Land revenue department is more reliable than that of any Income Tax Department. Reliance in this regard is being placed in the following cases: a) CIT vs K.R.N Prabhakaran HUF (Madras HC) as reported in 393 ITR 175 wherein it has been held as under: "Report of Inspector of Survey and Land Records more reliable than that of Income Tax Department Valuer" b) CIT vs Lal Singh & Ors as reported in 325 ITR 588 (P&H HC) "Land situated beyond 8 kms from municipal limits. Report of Tehsildar certified that the assessee's land was 8 kms away from the municipal limit…

M/S Ganga Nursing Home, Allahabad vs. DCIT, Allahabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 186/ALLD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 50C

…essee relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sakunthala Rangarajan , reported in (2016) 389 ITR 103(Mad. HC) and decision of .Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K.R.N. Prabhakaran(HUF) , reported in (2017)393 ITR 175(Mad. HC). It was submitted by ld. Counsel for the assessee that the land route is to be adopted for calculating the distance of the property from the Municipal Limit ,and not the aerial route to compute the distance between Municipal Limit and the property , because amendment was made by the Finance Act ,2013 w.e.f. 01.04.2014, which amendment as…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kushal Infraproject Industries India Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5460/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)

…70/Mum/2015 2. Income-tax Officer 5(1), Indore Vs. Ashok Shukla [2012] 139 ITD 666 (Indore) 3. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Vs. Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF) [2017] 393 ITR 175 (Madras) II. Agricultural land would fall outside term ‘capital asset’ if it fell beyond 8 kms of municipal limits on date of publication of relevant CBDT notification: 5. Satya Dev Sharma Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur [2014] 46 taxmann.com 149 (Jaipur – Trib.) 6. Smt. (Dr.) Subha Tripathi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle…

Kaushal Infraproject Industries India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5348/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)

…70/Mum/2015 2. Income-tax Officer 5(1), Indore Vs. Ashok Shukla [2012] 139 ITD 666 (Indore) 3. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Vs. Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF) [2017] 393 ITR 175 (Madras) II. Agricultural land would fall outside term ‘capital asset’ if it fell beyond 8 kms of municipal limits on date of publication of relevant CBDT notification: 5. Satya Dev Sharma Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur [2014] 46 taxmann.com 149 (Jaipur – Trib.) 6. Smt. (Dr.) Subha Tripathi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle…

Kaushal Infraproject Industries India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4136/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)

…70/Mum/2015 2. Income-tax Officer 5(1), Indore Vs. Ashok Shukla [2012] 139 ITD 666 (Indore) 3. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Vs. Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF) [2017] 393 ITR 175 (Madras) II. Agricultural land would fall outside term ‘capital asset’ if it fell beyond 8 kms of municipal limits on date of publication of relevant CBDT notification: 5. Satya Dev Sharma Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur [2014] 46 taxmann.com 149 (Jaipur – Trib.) 6. Smt. (Dr.) Subha Tripathi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kushal Infraproject Industries India Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2802/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 40A(2)

…70/Mum/2015 2. Income-tax Officer 5(1), Indore Vs. Ashok Shukla [2012] 139 ITD 666 (Indore) 3. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Vs. Lal Singh [2010] 325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF) [2017] 393 ITR 175 (Madras) II. Agricultural land would fall outside term ‘capital asset’ if it fell beyond 8 kms of municipal limits on date of publication of relevant CBDT notification: 5. Satya Dev Sharma Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur [2014] 46 taxmann.com 149 (Jaipur – Trib.) 6. Smt. (Dr.) Subha Tripathi Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle…

325 ITR 588 (Punjab & Haryana) 4. Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore v. KRN Prabhakaran (HUF) (393 ITR 175) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax