Anarkali Sarabhai v. CIT

224 ITR 422Supreme Court of India1997#5348 most cited

What is Anarkali Sarabhai v. CIT authority for?

Redemption of preference shares by a company constitutes a 'transfer' under Section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act, making it subject to capital gains tax under Section 45 for the shareholder.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Anarkali Sarabhai · Section 2(47) · Section 45 · redemption of preference shares · transfer of asset · capital gains tax · relinquishment of asset · sale of asset · extinguishment of rights · shareholder

Also reported as

90 Taxmann 509

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Anarkali Sarabhai v. CIT

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Ms. Piya Singh, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed partly for statistical purpose

ITA 2917/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Vs. Ms. Piya Singh, 15, Aurangzeb Acit, Circle-47(1), 426, Mayur Bhavan, New Delhi Road, New Delhi Pan : Apdps6582D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. Rupesh Jain, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Jain, Ca Date Of Hearing 03.01.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 14.02.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 29/03/2011 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xxx, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2006-07, Raising Following Grounds: “I) Deleting The Assessing Officer To Allow The Long Term Capital Loss & Thereby Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,09,90,799/- Made By The Ao On Account Of Long Term Capital Gain On Sale Of Apartment: Ii) Concluding The Fact That The Assessee Incurred Capital Loss First In Point Of Time & Capital Gains Were Arrived At Much Later Date Not Considering That It Was Not Only On 01.03.2006 I.E. On The Date Of Sale That The Assessee Came To Know That She Was Going To Earn Profit On Her Investment In The Apartment Rather It Was Well Within Her Knowledge That The Value Of Investment In The Property Was Appreciating & As She Invested In The Property Only For The Purpose Of Earning Profit, The Sale Of Shares Seven Months Before

…n by the Company. The Companies' Act, 1956 envisages two types of capital, equity share capital and preference share capital. Hence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that since redeemable preference shares are not bonds or debentures, the assessee 1 (1997) 224 ITR 422 (SC) VBC 5 itxa5372.10-27.4 would not be deprived of the benefit of indexation under Section 48 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3.8 In the instant case, we find that the assessee was holding preference shares in group companies and sold those shares to the company, which is owned by the assessee and her family members. The assessing officer observe…