Addl. CIT v. K.S. Gupta

119 ITR 372High Court1979#4287 most cited

What is Addl. CIT v. K.S. Gupta authority for?

Interest paid on borrowed funds for acquiring an asset should be included in the cost of acquisition for the purpose of determining capital gains. The actual cost includes all expenditure incurred to bring the asset into existence, as understood in commercial practice.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Addl CIT v K.S. Gupta · 119 ITR 372 · cost of acquisition · interest on borrowed funds · capital gains · section 48 · date of transfer · actual cost · expenditure incurred · fixed asset

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 48Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 14ASection 234C

Issues it is cited on

section 55section 48date of transfersection 50csection 50fair market valuesection 143(2)transfercompanybusinesssection 143(3)section 143

Judgments citing Addl. CIT v. K.S. Gupta

NARSHI GOPALJI MANGE,MUMBAI vs. ITO 27(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2064/MUM/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Om Prakash Kant ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69A

…ITA Nos. 7472 & 7473/Mum/2018, ITO v. Ramabrahmam 57 SOT 130 (Chennai ITAT), CIT v. K. Raja Gopal Rao-252 ITR 459 (Madras HC),CIT v. Sri Hariram Hotels Pvt Ltd-229 CTR 455 (Karnataka НС),CIT v. Mithlesh Kumari - 92 ITR 9 (Delhi HC), Addl CIT v. K. S. Gupta - 119 ITR 372 (Andhra Pradesh HC), SAS Hotel Ltd v. ITO-4 ITD 297 (Madras ITAT), S. Balan alias Shanmugam Balkrishnan ChettiaF V. DCIT - 120 ITD 469 (Pune ITAT), Praveen Gupta v. ACIT - 137 TTJ 307 (Delhi ITAT} and Burmah Castrol Plc, In re - 175 Taxman 353 (AAR) He submitted that the copy of the loan and interest certificate from Reliance Capital and ING Vais…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), DELHI vs. HKT CORPORATION PVT LTD, DELHI

The appeal are dismissed

ITA 1036/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 143(3)

…and legal position, interest expenses need to be capitalised and are to be allowed while computing the 12 Page ITA No. 1036/Del/2024 capital gains. Further, I am relying upon decisions in the following cases for this view. (i) Addl. CIT v K.S. Gupta (1979)119 ITR 372 (AP); the relevant portion is reproduced as below: "6. In the instant case, from the concession made by the department's representative before the Tribunal, it is clear that the interest of Rs.11,344 paid by the assessee from January 1, 1957, to August 11, 1966, was neither claimed by the assessee nor allowed by the department year after year. U…

INCLINE REALTY PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(1), MUMBAI

ITA 112/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda Matkari
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Incline Realty Private Limited Commerz, 3rd Floor, International Business Park, Oberoi Garden City, Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400063. Maharashtra. [PAN:AADCI5238A] …………. Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai Room No.419, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400051, Maharashtra …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta For the Respondent/Department : Ms. Vranda Matkari…

FUSION LASTEK TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 8(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1094/HYD/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 May 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Us:

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234CSection 48

…of the land to the assessee, which we afraid is not the issue in the present case before us, therefore, the said judicial pronouncement would also not come to the rescue of the assessee company. C. Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, A.P vs. K.S. Gupta [1979] 119 ITR 372 (AP): 21. As in the case of CIT vs. Mithilesh Kumari (supra), the issue involved in the captioned appeal was whether or not the interest paid by the assessee on the funds borrowed for the purchase of land would constitute part of the actual cost of land to the assessee for determining the capital gains arising on the transfer of the same, we are…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GOLDEN FALCON PACIFIC LTD., NAVI MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue is dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3895/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bledcit –Circle – 10(1) V. M/S. Golden Falcon Pacific Ltd New Delhi Off. 101, Real Tech Park Sector-30, Vashi, Near Railway Station Navi Mumbai - 400705 Pan: Aadcg8569L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Golden Falcon Pacific Ltd V. Dcit –Circle – 12(1) Now 10(1) C/O. M/S. Saraf & Chandra (C.A) Room No. 416-A Bharat Ins. Bldg, 3Rd Floor, 15-A Central Revenue Building Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumbai – 01 I.P. Estate, New Delhi - 110002 Pan: Aadcg8569L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)

…gned and registered on the same day did not render the mortgage and the borrowings made thereunder irrelevant to the task of determining the cost of acquisition 17. The Hon. Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Addl C.I.T. v K. S. Gupta reported in (1979) 119 ITR 372 (AP) held that; "CAPITAL GAINS - Land purchased with borrowed money - Interest paid on such borrowing should be included in Cost of acquisition for purpose of determining of Capital Gain.." this decision also held: "Held, that the expression "actual cost" has not been defined in the Act and as such the expression should be construed in the same s…

M/S. GOLDEN FALCON PACIFIC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue is dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3653/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bledcit –Circle – 10(1) V. M/S. Golden Falcon Pacific Ltd New Delhi Off. 101, Real Tech Park Sector-30, Vashi, Near Railway Station Navi Mumbai - 400705 Pan: Aadcg8569L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Golden Falcon Pacific Ltd V. Dcit –Circle – 12(1) Now 10(1) C/O. M/S. Saraf & Chandra (C.A) Room No. 416-A Bharat Ins. Bldg, 3Rd Floor, 15-A Central Revenue Building Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumbai – 01 I.P. Estate, New Delhi - 110002 Pan: Aadcg8569L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)

…gned and registered on the same day did not render the mortgage and the borrowings made thereunder irrelevant to the task of determining the cost of acquisition 17. The Hon. Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Addl C.I.T. v K. S. Gupta reported in (1979) 119 ITR 372 (AP) held that; "CAPITAL GAINS - Land purchased with borrowed money - Interest paid on such borrowing should be included in Cost of acquisition for purpose of determining of Capital Gain.." this decision also held: "Held, that the expression "actual cost" has not been defined in the Act and as such the expression should be construed in the same s…

MUNNUSWAMY RAJESH CHINTAKUNTA ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 41/HYD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2012-13 Munnuswamy Rajesh Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Chintakunta, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle – 3(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Abtpc8391G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca Revenue By: Shri T. Sunil Goutam. Date Of Hearing: 27.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. Sunil Goutam
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…be deducted while computing the capital gain and accordingly, we are of the opinion that the case of the Revenue is ITA 41/Hyd/2022 not at all maintainable and the assessee is entitled for the relief prayed for. In fact, in the matter of ACIT Vs. K.S. Gupta 119 ITR 372, Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court held as under : “4. Against the decision of the AAC, the revenue took the matter in appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the assessee filed cross-objections supporting the order of the AAC. Before the Tribunal, the department's representative conceded that the interest of Rs. 11,344 paid by the a…

TN (DK) EXPRESSWAYS LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 754/HYD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Tn(Dk) Expressways Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward -2(2), C/O. P. Murali & Co., Hyderabad. Chartered Accountants, 6-3-655/2/3, 1St Floor, Somajiguda, Hyderabad – 82. Pan : Aacct5634J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao. Revenue By: Sri Rohit Mujumdar. Date Of Hearing: 23/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26/11/2021 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y 2008-09 Arises From The Cit(A)-2, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 29.02.2016, In Case No.0226/2014-15 Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana RaoFor Respondent: Sri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…expenditure is allowable as this is the cost paid by the petitioner to hold on to the investment made before ultimately selling the investment. In this regard the Appellant relies on the judgements Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Addl. CIT Vs. KS Gupta (119 ITR 372) (Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Mithlesh Kumari (92 ITR 9) and Karnataka High Court in CIT Vs. Maithreyi Pal (152 ITR 247). The copies of above judgements are enclosed hereto for ready reference. 7. It is submitted that the stand of the Assessing Officer that the Appellant had capitalized interest expenditure and added it to Capital Works in progre…

JERRY MATHEW ELIAS KOVOOR,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, WARD- 1(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 151/BANG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kit(It)A No.151/Bang/2021 : Asst.Year 2017-2018 Sri.Jerry Mathew Elias Kovoor The Income Tax Officer B-1100, Chartered Coronet Ward (International Taxation) V. 1(2), Bengaluru. Arakere, Bannerghatta Road Bengaluru – 560 076. Pan : Aeqpk8249F. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Venkatesh Kumar, Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2021 Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2021

For Appellant: Sri.Venkatesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 24Section 48Section 69A

…aimed u/s 24 of the I.T.Act is in respect of purchase / construction of a house property and not in respect of purchase of vacant site. It was further submitted that the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Addl.CIT v. K.S.Gupta reported in (1979) 119 ITR 372 (AP) had categorically held that land purchased with borrowed money and interest payment of such borrowals should be included in the cost of acquisition for the purpose of determination of capital gains. 3.3 The learned Standing Counsel strongly supported the orders of the Income Tax Authorities. 3 IT(IT)A No.151/Bang/2021. Sri.Jerry Mathew Eli…

SMT. SAROJ BANSAL,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, both these appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 1226/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)

…lot of land which was sold during the year. Thus loan was directly relatable to purchase of property and so interest paid thereon is required to be included in cost of acquisition of said property. The A.P High Court in case of Addl. CIT Vs. K.S. Gupta (1979) 119 ITR 372 has following judgement of Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Mithilesh Kumari (1973) 92 ITR 9 held that interest paid on amount borrowed for purchase of open plot of land forms part of cost of acquisition. The High Court of Madras in case of 5 ITA 1225 & 1226/JP/2018_ Chitra Bansal Vs ACIT & 1 Anr CIT Vs. K. Raja Gopala Rao (2001) 252 ITR 459 and High…

SMT. CHITRA BANSAL ,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, both these appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 1225/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)

…lot of land which was sold during the year. Thus loan was directly relatable to purchase of property and so interest paid thereon is required to be included in cost of acquisition of said property. The A.P High Court in case of Addl. CIT Vs. K.S. Gupta (1979) 119 ITR 372 has following judgement of Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Mithilesh Kumari (1973) 92 ITR 9 held that interest paid on amount borrowed for purchase of open plot of land forms part of cost of acquisition. The High Court of Madras in case of 5 ITA 1225 & 1226/JP/2018_ Chitra Bansal Vs ACIT & 1 Anr CIT Vs. K. Raja Gopala Rao (2001) 252 ITR 459 and High…

ABDULLABHAI HASANALI THROUGH L/H ZOHRABAI,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T. CIR-3,, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 318/NAG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 271(1)

…that relying on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Kishorebhai Virani Vs. ACIT reported in (2014) 367 ITR 261 (Guj) and various decisions in the cases of CIT Vs. Mithilesh Kumari (1973) 92 ITR 9 (Del), Addl.CIT Vs. K.S. Gupta (1979) 119 ITR 372 (A.P.), S.Balanalias Shanmuqam Vs. DCIT (2009) 120 ITD 469 (Pune) and discussing all these judgments, Pune Bench of Tribunal held as under:- “10……. We further find that Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Royal Calcutta Turf Club (supra) has held that long term capital loss on sale of shares would be allowed to be set off against the long…

ABDULLABHAI HASANALI THROUGH L/H ZOHRABAI,NAGPUR vs. A.C.I.T. CIR-3,, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 317/NAG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 271(1)

…that relying on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Kishorebhai Virani Vs. ACIT reported in (2014) 367 ITR 261 (Guj) and various decisions in the cases of CIT Vs. Mithilesh Kumari (1973) 92 ITR 9 (Del), Addl.CIT Vs. K.S. Gupta (1979) 119 ITR 372 (A.P.), S.Balanalias Shanmuqam Vs. DCIT (2009) 120 ITD 469 (Pune) and discussing all these judgments, Pune Bench of Tribunal held as under:- “10……. We further find that Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Royal Calcutta Turf Club (supra) has held that long term capital loss on sale of shares would be allowed to be set off against the long…

SHRI. ABDULLABHAI HASANALI,,NAGPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,-II, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 621/NAG/2008[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 271(1)

…that relying on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Kishorebhai Virani Vs. ACIT reported in (2014) 367 ITR 261 (Guj) and various decisions in the cases of CIT Vs. Mithilesh Kumari (1973) 92 ITR 9 (Del), Addl.CIT Vs. K.S. Gupta (1979) 119 ITR 372 (A.P.), S.Balanalias Shanmuqam Vs. DCIT (2009) 120 ITD 469 (Pune) and discussing all these judgments, Pune Bench of Tribunal held as under:- “10……. We further find that Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Royal Calcutta Turf Club (supra) has held that long term capital loss on sale of shares would be allowed to be set off against the long…

SHRI RAMESHKUMAR TRIKAMLAL PADHIYAR,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT, CIRCLE-7,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.322/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Shri Rameshkumar Trikamlal Padhiyar Vs. Jcit, Cir.7 B-604, Prayag Apts., Ahmedabad. Opp: Nirma Vihar School Bodakdev Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Ackpp 6965 H

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kannan, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 55Section 55(2)

…additions or alterations to the capital asset by the assessee after it became his property,...". Further, the interest expense on money borrowed for purchase of asset is to be included in the cost of acquisition. According to Addl. CIT v/s. K. S. Gupta (1979) 119 ITR 372 (AP) and CIT V/s. Mithilesh Kumari (1973) 92 ITR 9 (Del.), interest paid by the assessee on money borrowed for the purchase of open plot of land constituted part of the actual cost of the assessee within the meaning of section 55(2) for the purpose of determining the capital gain derived from the sale of the land, The Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribu…

SMT. AMITA NARANG,DELHI vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 385/ASR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 385/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. K. R. Jain (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 45Section 48

…months of its’ purchase by the assessee in April, 2006. 2 Amita Narang v. Dy. CIT 3. The assessee before me relied, as was the case before the ld. CIT(A), on the decisions in CIT v. Mithlesh Kumari [1973] 92 ITR 9 (Del) and CIT (Addl.) v. K.S. Gupta [1979] 119 ITR 372 (AP). The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), Sh. Charan Dass, would rely on CIT v. Vardhman Polytex Ltd. [2008] 300 ITR 186 (P&H), rendered following CIT v. Vardhman Polytex Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 152 (P&H)(FB). 4. I have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. 4.1 Section 48, which provides the manner of computation of capital ga…

ANALJIT SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(2), DELHI

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

ITA 4737/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Kant

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50D

…95 defines the expression “cost of acquisition” in express terms and in an exhaustive manner for the right shares and bonus shares. In view of the change in law, the decision is wholly inapplicable.Regarding reliance placed on further decisions like KS Gupta (119 ITR 372), Maithreyi Pai (152 ITR 247), Trishul Investments (305 ITR 434), Raja Gopal Rao (252 TTJ 449)etc., He submitted that in none of these cases, the issue was the determination of the cost of acquisition of right shares of bonus.These were cases mostly relating to house property, or other kinds of immovable properties and in nowhere the amended prov…

ARIHANT CONSTRUCTION,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 18(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed in part

ITA 6692/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri A.V.SondeFor Respondent: Shri P.Nagendra Kumar
Section 143(3)

…y interest of Rs. 16,878 on the amount borrowed by her. The amount of Rs. 95,000 plus the interest paid by the assessee constitutes the actual cost to the assessee of the land….” Similar view was also taken in following decisions: a) Addl. CIT Vs. K.S. Gupta [119 ITR 372](Andhra Pradesh) b) S. Balan Alias Shanmugam Balkrishnan Chettiar Vs. DCIT [120 ITD 469](pune Tribunal) c) CIT & Anr Vs. Sri Hariram Hotels (P) Ltd [188 Taxman 170](Kamataka) 10. Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances, we can safely conclude that although the assessee has shown the Badlapur Land as WIP (i.e. inventory) in its boo…

DR. NARENDRA D. DESAI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CRN CIR 34, MUMBAI

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 5159/MUM/2010[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 55

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘फी’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.5157 to 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 to 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. ACIT, CC-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AACPD 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearin…

DR. NARENDRA D. DESAI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CRN CIR 34, MUMBAI

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 5158/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 55

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘फी’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.5157 to 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 to 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. ACIT, CC-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AACPD 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearin…

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

Addl. CIT v. K.S. Gupta (119 ITR 372) — Cited in 27 Judgments | BharatTax