Chalasani Venkateswara Rao v. ITO (

153 ITD 257Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#22732 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing Chalasani Venkateswara Rao v. ITO (

ITO 16(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Ramal P. Advani, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 6491/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Zaveri

Section 55F

…6 (SC))  CIT vs. Riyaz A. Sheikh (41 taxmann.com 455)(Bom)  Prashant S. Joshi vs. ITO (324 ITR 154) (Bom.)  Sharadha Terry Products Ltd vs. Asst. CIT (180 TTJ 284) (Chennai-Trib)  Chalasani Venkateswara Rao vs. ITO (349 ITR 423) (AP)  ACIT vs. N. Prasad (153 ITD 257) (Hyd.)  Mahul Construction Corporation vs. ITO (88 taxmann.com 181) (Mum-Trib)  Amit Kumar Choudhury vs. DCIT (2018) (2 TMI 1368)(Kol)  Shri Sachin Bhausaheb Nikam vs. DCIT (2016) (10TMI554)(Pune)  Ajay Kumar Doshi vs. Asst. CIT (2015) (12 TMI 1750)(Kol)  R. F Nangrani HUF, vs. DCIT and vice versa (2014) (12 TMI 11 75) (Mum-Trib)  DCIT vs.…

Puranjit Mukherjee, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-26, Kolkata

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

ITA 1358/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravia.Y 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Gupta, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT ( ld.DR)

Section 45(4)Section 55

…e ld. counsel for the assessee has contended that the said decision of the Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal is distinguishable on facts. He has also relied on the subsequent decision of the Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ACIT –vs.- N. Prasad [153 ITD 257], wherein the assessee on his retirement as a partner from the partnership firm had received a surplus amount of Rs.25,00 000/- in addition to his capital account balance. The said amount was brought to tax by the 3 Puranjit Mukherjee . Assessing Officer in the hands of the assessee under the head “capital gains” being the amount received on tr…

Amit Kumar Choudhury, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-6, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1357/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 147Section 148Section 55(2)(a)

…e ld. counsel for the assessee has contended that the said decision of the Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal is distinguishable on facts. He has also relied on the subsequent decision of the Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ACIT –vs.- N. Prasad [153 ITD 257], wherein the assessee on his retirement as a partner from the partnership firm had received a surplus amount of Rs.25,00,000/- in addition to his capital account balance. The said amount was brought to tax by the Assessing Officer in the hands of the assessee under the head “capital gains” being the amount received on transfer of goodwill. The l…