Badrilal Bholaram v. CIT (MP)

120 ITR 101High Court#9220 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

previous yeartransferpersoncompanyindiatotal incomebusiness

Judgments citing Badrilal Bholaram v. CIT (MP)

DCIT -26(1) , MUMBAI vs. SHREYAS BUILDERS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2404/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2404/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit-17(1) बिधम/ Shreyas Builders Room No. 117, 1St Floor, G- A-42, 4Th Floor Roop Vs. Block, Kautliya Bhavan, Darshan, Juhu Lane, Bandra Kurla Complex, Andheri (West), Mumbai- Mumbai-400051. 400058. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aapfs5485E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bhadresh Doshi Revenue By: Dr. Kishor Dhule (Cit,Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Nfac, [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit”], Delhi Dated 08.05.2023 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. In The Several Grounds Raised In The Appeal, The Revenue Has Agitated The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Holding That The Assessee Was Engaged In The Business Of Real Estate Development & Therefore The Plot Of Land Held By It Was In Nature Of ‘Stock-In-Trade’ As Opposed To The Ao’S Action Of Holding The Said Plot Of Land To Be In Nature Of ‘Capital Asset’. According To Revenue Therefore, Since The Said Plot Of Land To Be In Nature Of ‘Capital Asset’, The Levy Of Capital Gains Tax Stood Triggered Upon Execution Of Joint Development Agreement (Herein

For Appellant: Shri Bhadresh DoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule (CIT,DR)
Section 2(47)(v)

…dealing with land as his stock-in- trade ; he is carrying on business and making a profit. This is exactly what had happened in the assessee's case.” 15. Following the above ratio decidendi, the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of M.Krishna Rao (120 ITR 101) took note of the fact that, the assessee had purchased land along with another person. The Hon’ble Court observed that, the assessee had taken steps to convert the land-use and thereafter sold the same. The Hon’ble Court accordingly held that, whether the assessee intended to deal in real property or not has to be judged not form the fact that t…

GOOD HOMES PVT LTD,KOCHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 884/COCH/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.A.Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…Case law in the matter is legion, and the Revenue has in this regard rightly relied on decisions in Raja J. Rameshwar Rao v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 79 (SC); G Venkataswami Naidu & Co. v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 594 (SC) and CIT v. M. Krishna Rao [1979] 1 Taxman 33 (AP) [120 ITR 101]. 6.2 The claim qua AOP, canvassed in the alternative, may be considered next. There is, to begin with, no legal basis to raise such a claim. The return/s of income have been, in all cases, filed by the individual company/entity; the source of income being the sale of land by it, passing a legal title to the buyer thereof, and/or ERF, which agai…

AJIT ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. JCIT, CORPORATE RANGE - 1, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 870/COCH/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shriabyt.Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.A.Gopalakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…Case law in the matter is legion, and the Revenue has in this regard rightly relied on decisions in Raja J. Rameshwar Rao v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 79 (SC); G Venkataswami Naidu & Co. v. CIT [1959] 35 ITR 594 (SC) and CIT v. M. Krishna Rao [1979] 1 Taxman 33 (AP) [120 ITR 101]. 6.2 The claim qua AOP, canvassed in the alternative, may be considered next. There is, to begin with, no legal basis to raise such a claim. The return/s of income have been, in all cases, filed by the individual company/entity; the source of income being the sale of land by it, passing a legal title to the buyer thereof, and/or ERF, which agai…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. A.SIVASANKAR, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 953/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…f being developed into building site - No agricultural operations were carried out on land by the assessee - Adventure in the nature of trade. Badrilal Bholaram Vs. CIT (MP) 139 ITR 207 CIT Vs. B.Narasimha Reddy (Kar) 150 ITR 347 CIT Vs. M.Krishna Rao (AP) 120 ITR 101. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances, as well as the compelling nature of the judicial decisions, the incomes from sale of plots declared by the assessee for A.Y.2008-09 to 2011- 12 are upheld to be brought to taxation as income from business. The grounds of appeal by the assessee on this issue are dismissed. 13. Considering the facts and…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. A.SIVASANKAR, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 952/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…f being developed into building site - No agricultural operations were carried out on land by the assessee - Adventure in the nature of trade. Badrilal Bholaram Vs. CIT (MP) 139 ITR 207 CIT Vs. B.Narasimha Reddy (Kar) 150 ITR 347 CIT Vs. M.Krishna Rao (AP) 120 ITR 101. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances, as well as the compelling nature of the judicial decisions, the incomes from sale of plots declared by the assessee for A.Y.2008-09 to 2011- 12 are upheld to be brought to taxation as income from business. The grounds of appeal by the assessee on this issue are dismissed. 13. Considering the facts and…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. A.SIVASANKAR, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 951/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…f being developed into building site - No agricultural operations were carried out on land by the assessee - Adventure in the nature of trade. Badrilal Bholaram Vs. CIT (MP) 139 ITR 207 CIT Vs. B.Narasimha Reddy (Kar) 150 ITR 347 CIT Vs. M.Krishna Rao (AP) 120 ITR 101. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances, as well as the compelling nature of the judicial decisions, the incomes from sale of plots declared by the assessee for A.Y.2008-09 to 2011- 12 are upheld to be brought to taxation as income from business. The grounds of appeal by the assessee on this issue are dismissed. 13. Considering the facts and…

A.SIVASHANKAR,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 620/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…f being developed into building site - No agricultural operations were carried out on land by the assessee - Adventure in the nature of trade. Badrilal Bholaram Vs. CIT (MP) 139 ITR 207 CIT Vs. B.Narasimha Reddy (Kar) 150 ITR 347 CIT Vs. M.Krishna Rao (AP) 120 ITR 101. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances, as well as the compelling nature of the judicial decisions, the incomes from sale of plots declared by the assessee for A.Y.2008-09 to 2011- 12 are upheld to be brought to taxation as income from business. The grounds of appeal by the assessee on this issue are dismissed. 13. Considering the facts and…

A.SIVASHANKAR,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 619/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…f being developed into building site - No agricultural operations were carried out on land by the assessee - Adventure in the nature of trade. Badrilal Bholaram Vs. CIT (MP) 139 ITR 207 CIT Vs. B.Narasimha Reddy (Kar) 150 ITR 347 CIT Vs. M.Krishna Rao (AP) 120 ITR 101. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances, as well as the compelling nature of the judicial decisions, the incomes from sale of plots declared by the assessee for A.Y.2008-09 to 2011- 12 are upheld to be brought to taxation as income from business. The grounds of appeal by the assessee on this issue are dismissed. 13. Considering the facts and…

A.SIVASHANKAR,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 618/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…f being developed into building site - No agricultural operations were carried out on land by the assessee - Adventure in the nature of trade. Badrilal Bholaram Vs. CIT (MP) 139 ITR 207 CIT Vs. B.Narasimha Reddy (Kar) 150 ITR 347 CIT Vs. M.Krishna Rao (AP) 120 ITR 101. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances, as well as the compelling nature of the judicial decisions, the incomes from sale of plots declared by the assessee for A.Y.2008-09 to 2011- 12 are upheld to be brought to taxation as income from business. The grounds of appeal by the assessee on this issue are dismissed. 13. Considering the facts and…

A.SIVASHANKAR,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 617/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.617 To 620/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2011-12 Mr.A.Sivashankar, V. The Dy. Commissioner- 1/34, Pillayar Koil Street, Of Income Tax, Ayyappan Thangal, Central Circle-Iii(1), Chennai. Chennai. [Pan: Askps 6119 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.M. Rajan, CIT
Section 143(3)

…f being developed into building site - No agricultural operations were carried out on land by the assessee - Adventure in the nature of trade. Badrilal Bholaram Vs. CIT (MP) 139 ITR 207 CIT Vs. B.Narasimha Reddy (Kar) 150 ITR 347 CIT Vs. M.Krishna Rao (AP) 120 ITR 101. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances, as well as the compelling nature of the judicial decisions, the incomes from sale of plots declared by the assessee for A.Y.2008-09 to 2011- 12 are upheld to be brought to taxation as income from business. The grounds of appeal by the assessee on this issue are dismissed. 13. Considering the facts and…

SHRI.BABULAL,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WAD-2(2)(4), BANGALORE

ITA 887/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan, Vice-Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Soumya K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Jr. Standing Counsel
Section 54Section 54F

…the land not as a single unit and as he bought it but in parcles, he is dealing as his stock-in-trade; he is carrying on business and making a profit. He also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.Narasimha Reddy 150 ITR 347 (Karn.). 9. We have carefully considered the rival contentions. The Assessee purchased 32 Guntas of land on 7.9.2007. The land was originally agricultural land but was converted to non-agricultural use by order of Deputy Commissioner, Mysore District, Mysore dated 22.6.2006. Even prior to purchase the land use became non-agricultural. The Assess…

SHRI CHANDRABHAN SINGH CHOUDHARY,CHHINDWARA vs. THE DCIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed on ground no

ITA 170/IND/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 54F

…n of Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of CIT v. Suresh Chand Goyal, decision in Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Raja J. Rameshwar Rao vs. CIT 42 ITR 179 (SC) & decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT vs. B. Narasimha Reddy 150 ITR 347(Kar) submitted that when land is situated in a village, but located within the urbanized area and kept it uncultivated for several years and 7 Shri Chandrabhan Singh Choudhary after obtaining permission to convert the land for non- agricultural purposes, layouts for house sites were formed some of them were sold, then taking into consideration t…

Badrilal Bholaram v. CIT (MP) (120 ITR 101) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax