Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT

57 ITR 185Supreme Court of India1965#2179 most cited

What is Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT authority for?

A transfer of an immovable asset for capital gains purposes requires an effective conveyance through a registered sale deed to pass title. Prior to the amendment introducing Section 2(47)(v), transactions involving mere execution of documents or granting possession without registration were not considered complete transfers for tax.

53

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT · Alapati Venkataramiah · section 2(47) · section 2(47)(v) · section 53A · transfer of immovable property · capital gains · registered conveyance deed · effective conveyance · possession without registration · part performance · Indian Registration Act

Sections most often in play

Section 1908Section 144Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 147Section 17 of Indian Registration ActSection 17(1A) of Indian Registration Act

Issues it is cited on

section 45(2)section 2(47)(v)section 53ajoint development agreementsection 53jdasection 2(47)legal expensesright to receiveproject completion methodpercentage completion methodfull value of consideration

Judgments citing Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT

Saamag Construction Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2054/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…on relating to immovable property accrued or arisen in the year in which the sale deed has been registered irrespective of allowing of the possession of the property at an earlier date. Such law was held in the following cases: Alapati Venkata Ramaya vs. CIT 57 ITR 185 (SC) CIT vs. Meatles Ltd. 84 ITR 37 (SC) CIT vs. Hindustan Cold Storage & Refrigeration Pvt. Ltd. 103 ITR 455 (Del) Ghansham Dass Krishan Chander vs. CIT 121 ITR 121 (AP) Ld. Counsel of the assessee further stated that now after amendment made in the Registration Act by the Amendment Act, 2001 by way of insertion of Section 17(1A) of the Registra…

Saamag Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2053/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…on relating to immovable property accrued or arisen in the year in which the sale deed has been registered irrespective of allowing of the possession of the property at an earlier date. Such law was held in the following cases: Alapati Venkata Ramaya vs. CIT 57 ITR 185 (SC) CIT vs. Meatles Ltd. 84 ITR 37 (SC) CIT vs. Hindustan Cold Storage & Refrigeration Pvt. Ltd. 103 ITR 455 (Del) Ghansham Dass Krishan Chander vs. CIT 121 ITR 121 (AP) Ld. Counsel of the assessee further stated that now after amendment made in the Registration Act by the Amendment Act, 2001 by way of insertion of Section 17(1A) of the Registra…

Kamal Kishore Singhi, Mumbai vs. ACIT 26(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 813/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Kamal Kishore Singhi Asstt. Commissioner Of 10/161, Kamal Park Income Tax-26(1) K.G. Vs. Building, V.S. Marg, Mahim, Mittal Hospital Bldg., Mumbai-400016. 6Th Floor, Charni Road (W), Mumbai-400002 Pan No. Aadps3820K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Hari S. Raheja, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Hari S. Raheja, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 54

…ation of document which is relevant. Once the executed documents are registered, the transfer will take place on the date of execution of documents and not in the date of registration of the document. It has been held so in Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 185 (SC), CIT v. Podar Cements Pvt. Ltd. (1997) 226 ITR 625 (SC) and CIT v. Vishnu Trading & Investment Co. Ltd. (2003) 259 ITR 724 (Raj). Shri Kamal Kishore Singhi 7 In view of the above ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, we are not adverting to the other decisions relied on by both the sides. Thus the appellant has rightly claimed the ga…

M/S Chandigarh Bottling Co., Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 605/CHANDI/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar & Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Smt.Chander Kanta, Sr.DR

…ced on the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. F.X. Per/era and sons (Travancore ) Pvt. Ltd. reported in (1990) 184 ITR 461 in which the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Alapati Venkataramiah V. CIT, reported in (1965) 57 ITR 185 was -3/so considered. Since none of the entries made are supported by any executed or registered instrument of transfer, the same are only corrective in nature, giving no rise to any income, under any head of income". As a result, assessee was asked to provide various documents pertaining to the sale and purchase of the given property. (emphasis s…

Sh. Jai Ram, Jagadhari vs. ITO, Yamunanagar

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

ITA 366/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit GoelFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

…profits have arisen in the accounting year out of the sale of capital assets, what the parties did /subsequent to that year will not have any bearing on their liability to tax in respect of that year.” The Supreme Court in Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 185 held (per head note) : "Before section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, could be attracted, title must pass by any of the modes mentioned in section 12B, i.e., sale, exchange or transfer. In the context 'transfer' meant effective conveyance of the capital asset to the transferee. Delivery of possession of immovable property could not by it…

Sh. Amar Singh, Jagadhari vs. ITO, Yamunanagar

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

ITA 365/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit GoelFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

…profits have arisen in the accounting year out of the sale of capital assets, what the parties did /subsequent to that year will not have any bearing on their liability to tax in respect of that year.” The Supreme Court in Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 185 held (per head note) : "Before section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, could be attracted, title must pass by any of the modes mentioned in section 12B, i.e., sale, exchange or transfer. In the context 'transfer' meant effective conveyance of the capital asset to the transferee. Delivery of possession of immovable property could not by it…

Tina Kapoor, Mumbai vs. ITO 26(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5663/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Ms. Tina Kapoor Ito-26(2)(1) Flat No. 4, Sanghi House, 94, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. Nepean Sea Road, Road Mumbai-400006 Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aelpk9444F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Nitesh Joshi, Ar Revenue By : Mr. V. Justin, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/11/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/02/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Mr. V. Justin, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 54

…stration of document which is relevant. Once the executed documents are registered, the transfer will take place on the date of execution of documents and not on the date of registration of documents. It has been held so in Alapati Venkataramiah v. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 185 (SC), CIT v. Podar Cements Pvt. Ltd. (1997) 226 ITR 625 (SC) and CIT v. Vishnu Trading & Investment Co. (2003) 259 ITR 724 (Raj). We find that in the instant case the date of registration and payment of stamp duty in respect of Flat 2902 at RNA Mirage, Worli, Mumbai is 27.02.2007. The sale agreement is 10.03.2011. The date of registration and paym…

Parvinchand N. Sehgal (HUF), Mumbai vs. ITO 24(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

ITA 2305/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 50Section 54Section 54F

…gistered deed. Once the executed ITA No. 2304/MUM/2016 documents are registered, the transfer will take place on the date of execution of documents and not on the registration of documents. We refer here to the decision in Alapati Venkataramiah vs. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 185(SC) and CIT vs. Podar Cements Pvt. Ltd (1997) 226 ITR 625(SC). In Fibre Boards (P) Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held:- “That under section 54G the assessee is given window of three years after date on which transfer has taken place to “purchase” new machinery or plant or “acquire” building or land. This is why the expression used in…

ACIT 17(3), Mumbai vs. Jawaharlal L Agicha, Mumbai

ITA 1844/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 Acit 17(3) Shri Jawaharlal L. Agicha R.No.614, 6Th Floor, 99, Ray Road, बनाम/ Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400033 Vs. Parel, Mumbai-400012 (Revenue) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Adjpa2926K Revenue By Shri Sanjay Singh (Cit-Dr) Respondent By Shri Hiro Rai (Ar)

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(i)Section 2(47)(v)Section 4(1)

…stered conveyance deed. A document of sale, exchange or relinquishment in respect to immovable property has necessarily to be a registered document. This view finds support in the decision of Apex Court in the case of Alapati Venkataramiah vs. CIT reported at 57 ITR 185 (SC). As regard to applicability of provision of sub clause (v) of sec 2(47) of I T Act 1961, it can be seen from the arrangement executed by assessee with M/s. Shivalik Ventures that no possession is given by assessee to the said party. Bare perusal of sec 2(47) (v) would indicate that to invoke the provisions to hold that assessee has transferre…

Ghanshyam Harjivandas Patadia, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 25(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3643/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 3643/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2005-06 Mr. Ghanshyam The Ito-25(3)(1), बनाम/ Harjivandas Patadia, Mumbai Vs. C/O Sweet Home Developers Pvt. Ltd., 193, Bubna House, 1St Floor, S.V. Road, Kandivali(W), Mumbai-400 067 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabpp 4713A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Jayesh Dadia ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Airiju Jaikaran

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran
Section 133(6)Section 144Section 148

…elivery of possession of immovable property cannot by itself be treated as equivalent to conveyance of the 'immovable property and title to land and building and plant and machinery cannot pass to the buyer till conveyance is executed and registered:- (1965) 57 ITR 185 (SC) Alapati Venkatararamiah Mere delivery of possession accompanied by realization of sale' consideration does not divert the vendor of the ownership of the property and, therefore, it continues to belong to the vendor and can be included in his net wealth. (1986) 162 ITR 888 (SC) Nawab Sir Osman Ali Khan. The concept of sale of an immovable p…

Anusuya H. Dave, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 21(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal in ITA no 1038/Mum/2013 is allowed while the appeals in ITA no

ITA 156/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Amit Shukla () & Ramit Kochar ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “D” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI Before S/Shri Amit Shukla (Judicial Member) & Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1038/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dr. Devendra H. Dave ITO Ward 11(2)(2) Udgith, 35 443, Aayakar Bhavan Vallabhnagar Society v. 4th Floor, M.K. Road N.S. Road No. 3 New Marine Lines JVPD Scheme Mumbai-400 020. Vile Pare (West) Mumbai-400 056. PAN No.AABPD5432C (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 155/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year 2008-09) Shri Rajiv D. Dave Vs. ITO Ward 21(1)(4) Udgith, 35 C-10,…

Rajiv D. Dave, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 21(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal in ITA no 1038/Mum/2013 is allowed while the appeals in ITA no

ITA 155/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Amit Shukla () & Ramit Kochar ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “D” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI Before S/Shri Amit Shukla (Judicial Member) & Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1038/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dr. Devendra H. Dave ITO Ward 11(2)(2) Udgith, 35 443, Aayakar Bhavan Vallabhnagar Society v. 4th Floor, M.K. Road N.S. Road No. 3 New Marine Lines JVPD Scheme Mumbai-400 020. Vile Pare (West) Mumbai-400 056. PAN No.AABPD5432C (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 155/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year 2008-09) Shri Rajiv D. Dave Vs. ITO Ward 21(1)(4) Udgith, 35 C-10,…

Dr. Devendra H. Dave, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 11(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal in ITA no 1038/Mum/2013 is allowed while the appeals in ITA no

ITA 1038/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Amit Shukla () & Ramit Kochar ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “D” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI Before S/Shri Amit Shukla (Judicial Member) & Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1038/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Dr. Devendra H. Dave ITO Ward 11(2)(2) Udgith, 35 443, Aayakar Bhavan Vallabhnagar Society v. 4th Floor, M.K. Road N.S. Road No. 3 New Marine Lines JVPD Scheme Mumbai-400 020. Vile Pare (West) Mumbai-400 056. PAN No.AABPD5432C (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 155/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year 2008-09) Shri Rajiv D. Dave Vs. ITO Ward 21(1)(4) Udgith, 35 C-10,…