Chanchal Kumar Sircar v. Income Tax

50 SOT 289Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#11691 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing Chanchal Kumar Sircar v. Income Tax

Hema Daljit Singh Chadha, Mumbai vs. ITO 23(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is fully allowed

ITA 887/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalsmt. Hema Daljit Singh Chadha, Flat No. 204, Grant Canyon, Opp. Hdfc Bank, Pali Hill, Bandra West, Mumbai-400050. Pan: Acxpc0971B ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-23(1)(5), Room No. 114, Matru Mandir, 1St Floor, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400007 ..... Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/10/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(4)Section 2(47)Section 54

…h Court in the case of Chaturbhuj Das Kapadia (2003) 180 CTR 107 (Bom) ITAT Ahmedabad D Bench in Hasmukhbhai M Patel (2011) 46 SOT 419 (Ahd) ITAT Chennai B Bench in R Kalanidhi (2009) 122 TTJ 405 (Chennai) ITAT Kolkatta A Bench in Chanchal Kumar Sircar (2012) 50 SOT 289 (Kol) ITAT Mumbai A Bench in Gripwell Industries Ltd (2006) 102 TTJ 441 (Mum) ITAT Pune Bench in Dyaneshwar Mulik (2005) 98 TTJ 179 (Pune). 10. In view of the above we are of categorical view that assessee transaction of purchase for the purposes of sec 2(47)(v) i.e., transfer in her favour completed on 05-07-2008. On the other hand, transaction o…

Smt. Birma Devi, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated

ITA 678/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 678/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2013-14 cuke Birma Devi, I.T.O., Vs. B-21, Jadon Nagar, Near Ward 6(2), Railway Station, Durgapura, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BKCPD 2758 M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri B.K. Gup…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH’A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 365/Chd/2017 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) Sh. Amar Singh Vs. The ITO Vill- Jaroda Ward-3 Jagadhari Yamunanagar PAN: CBUPS7968E ITA Nos. 366/Chd/2017 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) Sh. Jai Ram Vs. The ITO Vill- Jaroda Ward-1 Jagadhari Yamunanagar (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Rohit Goel Department by : Smt. Chandrakanta Date of hearing : 29.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 26/02/2018 O R D E R PER DR.B.R.R.KUMAR, A.M. : This order shall dis…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH’A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 365/Chd/2017 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) Sh. Amar Singh Vs. The ITO Vill- Jaroda Ward-3 Jagadhari Yamunanagar PAN: CBUPS7968E ITA Nos. 366/Chd/2017 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) Sh. Jai Ram Vs. The ITO Vill- Jaroda Ward-1 Jagadhari Yamunanagar (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Rohit Goel Department by : Smt. Chandrakanta Date of hearing : 29.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 26/02/2018 O R D E R PER DR.B.R.R.KUMAR, A.M. : This order shall dis…

DCIT 22(2), Navi Mumbai vs. Rajesh Builders, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6131/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA No.2955/Mum/2012 (A.Y:2008-09) Rajesh Builder Commissioner of Income Tax, 1/1 Ghanshyam Baug, Cama, Circle 11 Aayakar Bhavan, Lane, Hansotia RD, Ghatkopar M.K. Road (W) Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 086 PAN No. AAEFR6687G Appellant .. Respondent ITA No.3454/Mum/2012 (A.Y:2004-05) Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajesh Builder Circle 11 Aayakar Bhavan, 1/1 Ghanshyam Baug, Cama, M.K. Road Lane, Hansotia RD, Ghatkopar Vs. Mumbai-400 020 (W) Mumbai-400 086 PAN No. AAEFR6687G Assessee by .. Shri Hari S Raheja…

Rajesh Builder, Mumbai vs. DCIT 22(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2955/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA No.2955/Mum/2012 (A.Y:2008-09) Rajesh Builder Commissioner of Income Tax, 1/1 Ghanshyam Baug, Cama, Circle 11 Aayakar Bhavan, Lane, Hansotia RD, Ghatkopar M.K. Road (W) Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 086 PAN No. AAEFR6687G Appellant .. Respondent ITA No.3454/Mum/2012 (A.Y:2004-05) Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajesh Builder Circle 11 Aayakar Bhavan, 1/1 Ghanshyam Baug, Cama, M.K. Road Lane, Hansotia RD, Ghatkopar Vs. Mumbai-400 020 (W) Mumbai-400 086 PAN No. AAEFR6687G Assessee by .. Shri Hari S Raheja…

Rajesh Builder, Mumbai vs. CIT 22, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2954/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA No.2955/Mum/2012 (A.Y:2008-09) Rajesh Builder Commissioner of Income Tax, 1/1 Ghanshyam Baug, Cama, Circle 11 Aayakar Bhavan, Lane, Hansotia RD, Ghatkopar M.K. Road (W) Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 086 PAN No. AAEFR6687G Appellant .. Respondent ITA No.3454/Mum/2012 (A.Y:2004-05) Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajesh Builder Circle 11 Aayakar Bhavan, 1/1 Ghanshyam Baug, Cama, M.K. Road Lane, Hansotia RD, Ghatkopar Vs. Mumbai-400 020 (W) Mumbai-400 086 PAN No. AAEFR6687G Assessee by .. Shri, AR Revenue b…

D.C.I.T Cir - 6, Kolkata vs. M/S Kilburn Engineering Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1987/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri R.S.Biswas, CITFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Singhi, AR
Section 45Section 54GSection 54G(2)

…see and he held as follows :- “35. The Hon’ble ITAT Kolkata Bench ‘A ‘ in the case of Chanchal Kumar Sircar v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-32(1) in IT Appeal Nos. 1146 and 1147 (Kol.) of 2011 for Assessment Year 2005-06 dated February 21, 2012 reported in (2012) 50 SOT 289 (Kol) has held that when an assessee received part payments after execution of agreement to sale and handing over of possession thereby completing the transaction in terms of section 53A of Transfer of Property Act but invested in specified bonds within one month of the receipt of sale consideration being part payment is eligible for exemption u/s…

Niamat Mahroof Virji, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1964/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1964/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Niamat Mahroof Virji, I.T.O. 17(3)(3), बनाम/ Unit 232, 2 Nd Floor, Piramal Chambers, V. Bussa Udyog Bhavan, Opp Parel P.O., T.J. Road, Mumbai. Sewree. Mumbai – 400 015. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aahpv1071H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Neil Philip
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 50CSection 54E

…tute in respect of provisions of Section 54E or Sections 54EA such as in the case of Mahesh Nemchandra Ganeshwade v. ITO [2012] 51 SOT 155/21 taxmann.com 136 (Pune), Bhikulal Chandak (HUF) v. ITO [2009] 126 TTJ 545 (Nag.), Chanchal Kumar Sircar v. ITO, [2012] 50 SOT 289/18 taxmann.com 304 (Kol.). We are in agreement with this legal proposition being laid down by the Hon'ble courts but to resolve this controversy we feel that a little more deliberation is required instead of deciding only on the basis of this thumb-rule. ITA 1964/Mum/2014 13 5.5 While dealing with this type of incentive provisions we may like t…

Chanchal Kumar Sircar v. Income Tax (50 SOT 289) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax