Atul G. Puranik v. ITO

132 ITD 499Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#2785 most cited

What is Atul G. Puranik v. ITO authority for?

Section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is a deeming provision, applies only to the transfer of "land or building or both" and therefore does not apply to the transfer of leasehold rights.

43

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

Atul G. Puranik v. ITO · Section 50C · transfer of leasehold rights · applicability of Section 50C · capital gains computation · land or building or both · deeming provision · stamp duty value · full value of consideration · ITAT Mumbai

Also reported as

11 Taxmann.com 9211 ITR 120

Sections most often in play

Section 50CSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 54DSection 56(2)(x)Section 139(1)Section 143(3A)Section 143(3B)

Issues it is cited on

compulsory acquisitionsection 50c(1)section 10(37)full value of considerationsection 50csection 50section 48date of transfertransfer of capital assetstamp duty valueshort term capital gainsfair market value

Judgments citing Atul G. Puranik v. ITO

NUTRELA MARKETING P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 7(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee dismissed

ITA 3910/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 50Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 3910/Mum/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Nutrela Marketing Pvt Vs. Income-Tax Officer Ltd 7(1)(1), Mumbai Office No. 15, Giriraj Aayakar Bhavan, Building, Iron Market, M.K. Marg, Mumbai- Sant Tukaram Road, 400020 Masjid Bunder, Mumbai - 400009 PAN:AACCN0459P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Rajiv Khandelwal Respondent by Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, SR. A.R. Date of Hearing 06.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 30.09.2025 ORDER Per: Smt. Beena Pillai…

TECKMEN SYSTEMS ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 27(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the above terms

ITA 28/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri G. P. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajit Pal Singh, SR. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 50CSection 55A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, AM Teckmen Systems ITO Ward 27(3)(1) C/o. G. P. Mehta & Co. CAS, 807, Room No. 422, Tower – 6, Vashi Tulsiani Chambers, Nariman Point, Railway Station, Commercial Vs. Mumbai – 400021. Complex, Vashi, New Bombay – 400 703. PAN/GIR No. AAAFT3969K (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri G. P. Mehta, CA Respondent by : Shri Ajit Pal Singh, SR. DR. Date of Hearing : 17.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30.06.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This appeal has been filed by the assessee, challenging…

SANGEETA RAVINDRA CHANADAN,MUMBAI vs. 19(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 457/Mum/2024 is allowed

ITA 457/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Ms. Asifa KhanFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon SRDR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

…ed 15 June 2012 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The issue before the Tribunal Act would be applicable to transfer of leasehold rights in land and buildings. The impugned order Tribunal followed its decision in Atul G. Puranik v. ITO (20111 132 ITD 499/11 taxmann.com 92(Mum) which held that Section 50C is not applicable while computing capital gains on transfer of leasehold rights in land and buildings. 4.MrKotangale, learned Counsel for the Revenue, states that the Revenue has not preferred any appeal against the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Atul G. Puranik (supra). Thus, it could…

ACIT, MUMBAI vs. ASHOK NARENDRA MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3373/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year 2018-19 Acit, Circle – 19(1) Ashok Narendra Mehta, 5Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, 132, 13Th Floor, Lalbaug, Vs. Siddhesh Darshan, Mumbai. 10Th Khetwadi Main Road, Khetwadi, Mumbai Pan : Aivpm9318A (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Vimal Punmiya, C.A. For Revenue : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 13-08-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-08-2024 Order Per B.R. Baskaran, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr.DR
Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(x)

…of Section 56(2)(x) are applicable to a buyer. The question as to whether the 4 provisions of Section 50C of the Act would be applicable to transfer of lease hold right came to be examined by the co-ordinate bench in the case of Atul G Puranik vs. ITO (2011) (132 ITD 499) (Mumbai). It was held that the provisions of Section 50C of the Act will not be applicable to lease hold rights. The relevant discussions made by the co-ordinate bench are extracted below:- “11.1 In order to appreciate the rival contentions on this issue, it would be apt to consider the prescription of sec. 50C(1), which is as under : "50C. (1)…

SHIVDEEEP TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO,WARD-2(3), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 484/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 50C

…de Ground Nos. 1-4 as per Form-35 though after filing the detailed submission in this regard. The Ld. Counsel prayed for decision on the legal matter/reopening of the assessment. 5. The Ld. Counsel, placing emphasis on the following decision; Atul G. Puranik [132 ITD 499 (Mum.), Ritz Suppliers (P.) Ltd.182 ITD 227, Sowmya Sathyan [2021] 124 taxmann.com 74/187 ITD 149, Noida Cyber Park Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 165/Del/2020), Bharat Bhushan Jain (ITA No. 316/Del/2020), M/s. Envair Electrodyne Ltd. (ITA No. 611/Pun/2018) Shri Kadir Ahmed (ITA No. 418/Del/2020) and Damyanti Mundhra (ITA No. 1722/Del/2019), submitted that t…

GOODWILL CONSTRUCTIONS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, , THANE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3233/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Parwani, Sr. DR
Section 142A(1)Section 43C

…g provision which is limited to land, building or both cannot be extended beyond the purpose for which it is enacted and is therefore not applicable in the instant case. The Ld. AR, has relied on the Coordinate Bench's decision in the case of Atul G. Puranik (132 ITD 499) (Mum Trib) supra which squarely supports the case of the assessee. In that case, the assessee was allotted lease right in a plot for a period of sixty years. The relevant finding of the Coordinate Bench contain at para 11.4 of its order is reproduced as under: "In view of the aforenoted judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court and that of t…

BHAVESH SHANTILAL GOHIL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-35(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 175/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalbhavesh Shantilal Gohil A-1304, Gohil Mansion, Irani Wadi, Shantilal Mody X Road No. 2, Asian Bakary Kandivali (West), Mumbai-400067 Pan: Abkpg2287Q ...... Appellant Vs. Ito – 35(1)(2) R. No. 2, C-12, Pratayaksha Kar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400051 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Ld. DR
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 50C

…oner of Income Tax (Appeals). The issue before the Tribunal was whether Section 50C of the Act would be applicable to transfer of leasehold rights in land and buildings. The impugned order of the Tribunal followed its decision in Atul G. Puranik v. ITO [2011] 132 ITD 499/11 taxmann.com 92 (Mum.) which held that Section 50C is not applicable while computing capital gains on transfer of leasehold rights in land and buildings.” [2020] 119 taxmann.com 186 (Mum. - Trib.) Network Construction Company, v. ACIT, Circle-2, Thane “12. The learned Counsel for the assessee specifically relied on the Mumbai Tribunals decisi…

FASHION GROUP INTERNATIONAL,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, PANIPAT

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

ITA 122/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Adv
Section 50C

…e year under consideration. Reliance is placed on the following judgments:- (i) JCIT Vs. Sesha Giri Rao ITA 760 & 50/ HydI 2016, dt. 30.11.2017 (ii) CIT Vs. Greenfield Hotels and Estates Pvt. Ltd., (2016) 389 ITR 68 (Bom) (iii) Atul G. Puranik Vs. ITO, (2011) 11 ITR 120 (Iv) Baniara Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, ITA 635/Kol/ 2018, dt. 07.07.2018 9. Without prejudice, there being no transfer of any property during the year under consideration the losses incurred by the assessee are to be treated as business loss of the assessee as there was a loss incurred by the assessee in the course of its business only. 4. Prec…

DIYA FABRICS,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(1), SURAT

In the result, while appeal of the assessee is allowed, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 355/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Diya Fabrics, Vs. The Ito, 1418, Kohinoor Market, Ring Road, Ward-1(2)(1), Surat. Surat – 395002. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aajfd3658A

Section 40A(3)Section 68

…the provisions of section 50C can be invoked in respect of the lease hold property, this issue is no longer res integra. Diya Fabrics There are several decisions of this Tribunal including the case of DCIT vs. Tejinder Singh (supra), Atul G. Puranik vs. ITO [132 ITD 499 (Mum Trib)] in support of the proposition. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shri Kishan Das – ITA No.64 of 2014, judgement dated 10.02.2014, has approved this school of thought and inter alia observed as follows :- “3. It is contended on behalf of the Revenue that the Tribunal fell into error because Section 50C does not make any d…

ACIT -893) (1) , MUMBAI vs. M/S. TRIPLE SECURITIES PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 2270/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Hande
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 43C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "E" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- 8(3)(1), Mumbai, Aaykar Bhavan, Room No. 615, M.K. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai - 400020 …………… Appellant Vs Triple Securities Pvt. Ltd., 3rd Floor, 33 Huges N S Patkar Marg, Grant Road, Mumbai - 400007 [PAN: AABCT2752J] ……………. Respondent Appearances For the Assessee/Department : Ms. Samruddhi Hande For the Respondent/Assessee : Shri Nitesh Joshi Date of conclusion of hearing : 23.09.2022 Date of pronouncement of order : 20.12.2022 O R D E R Pe…

DNYANESHWAR SHANKAR GHORPADE,BADLAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2 (4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 7985/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H Of Late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (W), 421 301 (East)-421 503 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARSHI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) & SMT. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade vs Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 PAN : AEHPG5210M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade vs Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H of late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (…

SUBHASH MARUTI GHORPADE,THANE vs. ITO WARD 2 (4), KALYAN

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 6948/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H Of Late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (W), 421 301 (East)-421 503 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARSHI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) & SMT. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade vs Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 PAN : AEHPG5210M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade vs Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H of late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (…

SHANKAR RAMA GHORPADE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1168/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H Of Late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (W), 421 301 (East)-421 503 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARSHI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) & SMT. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade vs Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 PAN : AEHPG5210M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade vs Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H of late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (…

SUBHASH MARUTI GHORPADE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1167/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal () Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2Nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H Of Late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (W), 421 301 (East)-421 503 Pan : Aehpg5210M Appellant Respondent

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARSHI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) & SMT. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Shri Shankar Rama Ghorpade vs Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, Shiv Parvati Bangalow Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan (East)-421 503 (W), 421 301 PAN : AEHPG5210M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Dnyaneshwar Shankar Ghorpade vs Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(4), Kalyan, 2nd Floor, Mohan Plaza, (L/H of late Shankar Rama Ghorpade), Shiv Parvati Bangalow Wayale Nagar, Khadakpada, Kalyan Katrap Gaon, Kulgaon, Badlapur (…

M/S. MUKESH GOPALDAS DATTANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 17(2)(4), MUMBAI

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 5644/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Paresh Shaparia, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 234BSection 50C

…ourt has declined to admit the question raised by the revenue. Similar is the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in V.S.Chandrashekhar V/s ACIT (ITA No. 70 of 2015 dated 02/02/2021). Similar is the decision of Mumbai Tribunal in Atul G. Puranik V/s ITO (11 Taxmann.com 92 dated 13/05/2011). This being so, we would hold that the provisions of Sec.50C would not be applicable to the transaction under consideration and therefore, the consequential addition made in the hands of the assessee, would not be sustainable in law. We order so. This plea of Ld. AR stand allowed which render all the other related grounds…

DHARAMPAL BROTHERS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY. CIT 9(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 1946/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1946/Mum/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16) बनधम/ Dharampal Brothers Pvt. Dcit-9(3)(1) Room No.215, 2Nd Floor, Ltd. Vs. Mehra Industrial Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Compound, Sakinaka, Road, Mumbai-400020. Andheri Kurla Road, Mumbai-400072. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaacd4297R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Shekar Gupta Revenue By: Shri Bharat Andhale (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/04/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.02.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2015-16. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate That The Provisions Of Section 50C Do Not Apply To A Leasehold Land. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Failed To Consider The Decision Of The Bombay High Court In The Case Of Cit Vs Greenfield Hotels & Estates (P) Ltd. 389 Itr 68 (Bombay) Wherein The Hon’Ble Bombay High Court Held That Section 50C Does Not Apply To Leasehold Land. 3. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On The Facts Of The Case In Sustaining The Addition Of An Amount Of Rs.40,87,381/- As Short Term Capital Gain & Rs.1,65,91,485/- As Long Term Capital Gains.”

For Appellant: Shri Shekar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 50C

…oner of Income Tax (Appeals). The issue before the Tribunal was whether Section 50C of the Act could he applicable to transfer of leasehold rights in land and buildings. The impugned order of the Tribunal followed its decision in Atul G. Puranik v. ITO (2011) 132 ITD 499/11 taxmann.com 92 (Mum.) which held that Section 50C is not applicable while computing capital gains on transfer of leasehold rights in land and buildings. 4. Mr. Kotangale. learned Counsel for the Revenue, states that the Revenue has not preferred any appeal against the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Atul G. Puranik (supra). Thus, it co…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI vs. USV LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4915/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. Rajan Vora, AR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s USV Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner of Income Arvind Vithal Gandhi Chowk, Vs. Tax Central Circle 5(1), BSD Marg, Govandi, 19th Floor, Air India Building, Mumbai-400088. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 PAN No. AAACU 1366 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT Central Circle 5(1), M/s USV Private Limited, R. No. 1928, 19th Floor, Air Vs. Arvind Vithal Gandhi Chowk, BSD India Building, Nariman Point, Marg, Govandi, Mumbai 400…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(1), MUMBAI vs. USV LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4914/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. Rajan Vora, AR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s USV Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner of Income Arvind Vithal Gandhi Chowk, Vs. Tax Central Circle 5(1), BSD Marg, Govandi, 19th Floor, Air India Building, Mumbai-400088. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 PAN No. AAACU 1366 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT Central Circle 5(1), M/s USV Private Limited, R. No. 1928, 19th Floor, Air Vs. Arvind Vithal Gandhi Chowk, BSD India Building, Nariman Point, Marg, Govandi, Mumbai 400…

NOIDA CYBER PARK PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 18(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 165/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Aggarwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms Banita M. Biswas C.I.T. DR
Section 115JSection 142Section 143(3)Section 50Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’ DELHI (Through Video conferencing) BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY : 2015-16 Noida Cyber Park Pvt. Ltd., vs Income Tax Officer, 301-A, World Trade Tower, Ward 18(4), Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi. Connaught Place, New Delhi. (PAN: AAACF5292Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri V.K. Aggarwal, AR Shri B.K. Rai Chaudhary, Advocate Ms Shweta Bansal, CA Respondent by: Ms Banita M. Biswas C.I.T. DR ORDER PER G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the…

SANKALPAN INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-15(3)(3), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 6010/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6010/Mum/2017 & 2400/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 &2013-14)

For Appellant: ShriSubodhFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 41

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6010/Mum/2017 & 2400/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 &2013-14) ITO 15(3)(3), Sankalpan Infrastructure R. No. 480, 4th floor, Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ 304, Sentinel, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Hiranandani Business Road, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Park, Powai, Mumbai- 400 076 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN No. AAICS6802P (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : ShriSubodh Ratnaparkhi, AR प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri V. Vinod Kumar, DR सुनवाईकीतारीख…

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3