How many judgments cite CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff?

40 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff (48 ITR 59), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 143(2), Section 250, Section 144, Section 148.

CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff

48 ITR 59Supreme Court of India1963#2957 most cited

What is CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff authority for?

Assessment proceedings initiated against a deceased person are void. Once an assessee dies, assessment proceedings can only continue in the name of their legal representative, to the extent of the deceased's estate.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff · 48 ITR 59 · SC · deceased assessee · legal representative · void assessment · estate liability · section 159

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250 Section 144 Section 148 Section 1961 Section 50C

Issues it is cited on

section 7(1)section 50c(1)section 153(2)section 159 section 45(5)compulsory acquisition legal representative enhanced compensation full value of consideration section 2(14)transfer of capital asset section 48

Judgments citing CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), NAGPUR vs. KHARE AND TARKUNDE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 279/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roydcit, Central Circle-2(1), Khare & Tarkunde Nagpur Vs Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 235, Shivaji Complex, Dharmpeth, Nagpur Pan : Aaack 7184 N Department Assessee Assessee By : Shri Sachin V. Luthra, Ca Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.04.2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. Luthra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

…stock-in-trade. In the present case, the subject matter of transfer is TDR, which is a development right and not land or building per se. Deeming provisions cannot be carried beyond the purpose for which they were enacted. CIT vs. Amarchand N. Shroff [1963] 48 ITR 59 (SC) ➢ ➢ CIT vs. Mother India Refrigeration Industries P. Ltd. (1985) 1551 ITR 711 (SC) 6 We find that this issue is no longer res integra. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Greenfield Hotels & Estates Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held that transfer of TDR does not amount to transfer of land or building and hence provisions of section 50C are not…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), NAGPUR vs. KHARE AND TARKUNDE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 279/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. Luthra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), NAGPUR vs. KHARE AND TARKUNDE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 279/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. Luthra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

JAYVEERSINGH JASHUBHAI CHUDASAMA L/H DIVYABEN JAYVEERSINGH CHUDASAMA,VALSAD vs. ITO, WARD 5, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 204/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Surat23 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CAFor Respondent: Ms Namita Patel, Sr. DR

Section 148Section 250

…a dead person is not valid and the consequential assessment or re-assessment order also does not survive. It is now well settled that any proceedings against a dead person is a nullity. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Amarchand N. Shroff, (1963) 48 ITR 59 (SC) held that the individual assessee must be a living person, and no assessment can be made on a dead person. Accordingly, the order of CIT(A) is quashed. Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 3– In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 7. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 23.01.2026. (SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE) VICE-PRESIDENT Surat; Dated 23.0…

LATE PRIYANK NARENDRABHAI PATEL THROUGH HIS LH NARENDRABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-01 BARDOLI, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1300/SRT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1300/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Late Priyank Narendrabhai Patel, Vs. Ito, Through His L/H Narendrabhai Patel, Ward – 2, At & Post – Tundi, Tal – Palsana, Bardoli Surat - 394315 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Asapp4783F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Hiren Vepari, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/12/2025

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1300/SRT/2024 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Late Priyank Narendrabhai Patel, Vs. ITO, Through his L/h Narendrabhai Patel, Ward – 2, At & Post – Tundi, Tal – Palsana, Bardoli Surat - 394315 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: ASAPP4783F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Hiren Vepari, CA Respondent by Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 10/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 03/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH…

LATE SITTHAGOUNDER RASU, REPL BY LEGAL HEIR R. KUMARESAN,BHAVANI vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), ERODE

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

ITA 2311/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2311/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Late Sitthagounder Rasu By L/R. R. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Kumaresan, 693, Kuthiraikalmedu, Ward 1(4), Kadappanallur Post, Bhavani, Erode. Tamil Nadu 638 311. [Pan:Bdrps0224H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C.P. Solomon, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.07.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. In The Grounds Of Appeal, Besides Challenging The Assessment Made On A Deceased Person Is Bad In Law & Not Legally Sustainable On 2

For Appellant: Shri Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…d and should have dropped the proceedings initiated against the deceased assessee in as much as the proceedings cannot be continued on a deceased person. By relying on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff [1963] 48 ITR 59 as well as the decision in the case of CIT v. Shantilal C. Mehta [1978] 113 ITR 79 (Cal), the ld. AR argued on the death of an assessee, his estate remains liable for payment of taxes accruing both before and after his death and moreover, after the death of 3 I.T.A. No.2311/Chny/25 the assessee, the assessment proceedings can only continue in the…

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

…sessable by the stamp valuation authority shall, for the purpose of section 48, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such a transfer. 6.3. Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff reported in(1963) 48 ITR 59 considered the scope of a deeming provision and came to hold that it cannot be extended beyond the object for which it is enacted. Similar view has been reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Mother India Refrigeration Industries (P.) Ltd. reported in (1985) 155 ITR 711 by laying down that, "legal fictions are created only for some definite…

PANNABEN GUNVANBHAI DESAI L/H OF LATE GUNVANRAI VASANJI DESAI,VALSAD vs. ITO, WARD-3, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 133/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.133/Srt/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Pannaben Gunvanvai Desai, Vs. Ito, L/H Of Late Gunvanrai Vasanji Ward – 3, Desai, Vapi 01-Desai Fakliyu, Pardi – Parners – Valsad - 396001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acypd7934Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rajesh Upadhyay, Ar Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/08/2025

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…on’ble High Court had held that any notice issued in the name of dead person is unenforceable and invalid. It is now well-settled that any proceedings against a dead person is a nullity. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Amarchand N. Shroff, (1963) 48 ITR 59 (SC) held that the individual assessee must be a living person and no assessment can be made on a dead person. In view of the authoritative precedents cited supra, the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act as well as the assessment order passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act are not liable to be sustained and are accordingly quashed. Consequently, the or…

INCOMETAX OFFICER WARD-3(3)(1),AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. HARESH DAYASHANKAR SHRIVASTAV, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 684/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarassessment Year : 2017-18 Income-Tax Officer, Haresh Dayashankar Shrivastav, Vs Ward 3(3)(1), 35, Swetanjali Society, Nr. Ahmedabad Hasubhai Park, Satellite, Ahmedabad-380015 Pan : Bbpps 5719 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Arsh Shaikh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar:

For Appellant: Shri Arsh Shaikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr DR

Section 142(1)Section 144

…ntimate the death of the assessee or take steps to cancel the PAN registration of the deceased. 6.2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Amarchand N. Shroff, reported in [1963] 48 ITR 59 (SC), wherein it was held that the proceedings are void, if issued in name of dead person and the legal representative is liable only to the extent of the estate of the deceased. The Ld. Counsel also relied upon various other case-laws in similar lines and pleaded to confirm the appellate order passed by the Ld CIT[A] and dismiss the Revenue appeal…

LATA VIKRAM PUNVANI THROUGH TEHMINA PUNVANI LEAGL HEIR,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-5(3), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 573/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

…e, I do agree with Learned counsel for the assessee that the assessment made by the Assessing Officer is illegal and void ab initio. My aforesaid view is duly supported by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Amarchand N. Shroff [1963] 48 ITR 59 (SC) and Income Tax Officer vs. Durlabhbhai Kanubhai Rajpura [2020] 114 taxmann.com 482 (SC). This view is further in conformity with order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, which is the jurisdictional High Court, I.T.A. No.573/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2017-18 4 in the case of CIT vs. Suresh Chandra Jaiswal 325 ITR 563 (Allahabad). Moreover, in th…

BHARAT RANCHOD L/H OF GOVAN MORAB RANCHOD,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1301/SRT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1301/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Bharat Ranchod Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ L/H. Govan Morab Ranchod (International Taxation) Room Vs. 404, Priyanka, B/H Parsi No. 107, Income Tax Office, Hospital, Luncikui, Navsari-396 Anavil Business Centre, Adajan- 445 Hazira Road, Adajan, Surat-395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Amkpr 4787 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 12/03/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/03/2025

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

…d void ab initio. The relevant part of the order is as under: “6. … …. There is no dispute that both AO and CIT(A) have passed orders on a dead person, which is nullity and void ab initio. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Amarchand N. Shroff, 48 ITR 59 (SC) has held that the individual must be a living person and no assessment can be made on a dead person. Various appellate fora have also held that no order of assessment or reassessment could be made on a dead or non-existing person. Hence, the order passed b t he Ld.CIT(A) is a nullity in the eyes of law. Hence, the same is quashed and appeal of…

MR. JOY BAJAJ S/O SHYAM SUNDAR BAJAJ, vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed

ITA/88/2020HC Rajasthan11 Mar 2025

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,MANEESH SHARMA

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…deeming fiction on transfer of property without consideration or for an amount lesser than the stamp duty value. The Supreme Court in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City I, Bombay Vs. Amarchand N. Shroff reported in (1963) 48 ITR 59 (SC) held. “10. xxxxxxxxxxxx As was observed by this Court in Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. v. The State of Bihar {1955}2SCR603, legal fictions are only for a definite purpose and they are limited to the [2025:RJ-JP:11201-DB] (7 of 7) [ITA-88/2020] purpose for which they are created and should not be extended beyond the legitimate field.…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(2)(1), MUMBAI, INCOME TAX OFFICE, MUMBAI vs. ESSAR POWER JAMNAGAR LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 2463/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Essar Power Jamnagar Ltd., Ward 6(2)(1), 11, Essar House, K.K. Marg, Vs. Mumbai Mahalaxmi, Mumbai – 400 034 (Pan : Aabce8921G) (Assessee) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta, Ca Revenue : Shri Biswanath Das, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2024 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1062839468(1), Dated 18.03.2024 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Income Tax Officer, Ward – 6(2)(4), U/S. 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 29.03.2016 For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Grounds Taken By The Revenue Are Reproduced As Under: "1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Citia) Was Justified In Declaring The Assessment Order Passed As Nullity Without Considering The Fact That The Assessee Was In Existence When The Transactions Were Made? 2. "Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Citia) Was Justified In Treating The Assessment Proceedings As Without Jurisdiction, Without Considering The Fact That The Reference Can Be Made For Revival Of Companies From The Date Of Strike Off, As Per The Instruction By The Cbdt Vide Letter Dated 29.12.2017?

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT, DR

Section 144Section 148Section 560

…Ltd. v. CIT, ITA No. 475 of 2011 judgment dated 08.08.2011 of Hon'ble Delhi High Court 2. CIT v. Express Newspapers Ltd. [1960] 40 ITR 38 (Mad.) 3. K. Agencies (P.) Ltd. v. CWT [2012] 347 ITR 664/20 taxmann.com 731 (Cal.) 4. CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff [1963] 48 ITR 59 (SC) 5. CIT v. Kurban Hussain Ibrahimji Mithiborwala [1971] 82 ITR 821 (SC). 6. CIT v. Vived Marketing Servicing (P.) Ltd. ITA No. 273/2009 order dated 17.09.2009 of Hon'ble Delhi High Court 7. Khurana Engg. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (OSD) [2014] 364 ITR 600/[2013] 217 Taxman 75 (Mag.)/34 taxmann.com 261 (Guj.) 8. Torrent (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (SCA No. 5857 of 20…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA vs. GPT SONS PVT LTD

The appeal is dismissed

ITAT/195/2024HC Calcutta08 Nov 2024

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : November 08, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….For Appellant Mr. Amit Agarwal, Adv. …For Respondents

Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 292B

…od 24 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/195/2024 IA NO: GA/2/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 2 KOLKATA VS GPT SONS PVT LTD BEFORE : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM -A N D- HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA DATE : November 08, 2024. Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….for appellant Mr. Amit Agarwal, Adv. …for respondents The Court :- We have heard the learned Advocates for the parties. The revenue has filed this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (th…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “A” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment 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 : The Revenue has filed this appeal challenging the or…

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

…ight in land or building, forming part of an industrial undertaking…..". Thus, it is palpable from section 54D of the Act that 'land or building' is distinct from 'any right in land or building'. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amarchand N. Shroff 48 ITR 59 has held that a deeming provision cannot be extended beyond the purpose for which it is enacted. Similar view was reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mother India Refrigeration Industries (P.) Ltd. 155 ITR 711 by laying down that "legal fictions are created only for some definite purpose and these must be limited to that purpose…

DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. A R SULPHONATES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 570/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajeeva Kumar, Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 50C

…of which it is enacted. The mandate of sec. 50C extend only to capital asset, being land or building or both. To buttress his contention on this proposition, he placed reliance on judicial precedence of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Amarchand N. Shroff 48 ITR 59, Mother India Refrigeration India Pvt. Ltd. 155 ITR 711 wherein, inter alia, it was held that legal fictions are only for a definite purpose. They are limited to the purpose for which they are created and should not be extended beyond their legitimate field. 7.5. On the second leg of his contention, ld. Counsel referred to the first and second pro…

SH. SUNIL GUPTA,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees bearing ITA Nos

ITA 77/ASR/2006[1988-89]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Dec 2023AY 1988-89

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 45(5)Section 6Section 7(3)

…dividual who represents the estate and it I.T.A. Nos. 75 to 77/Asr/2006 Assessment Year.: 1988-89 13 is he that is taxed in his own name and hence, his name and identity should be clearly specified in the order of assessment (CIT v Amarchand N. Shroff (1963) 48 ITR 59 SC) 9. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The land of the assessee at Talwal was duly requisitioned on dated 01.04.1968, the land of Mr. Sunil Gupta at Rampur was requisitionedon 01/03/1949 and the land of Smt. Anuradha Mahajan at Goverdhanpai was requisitioned on 10/09/1965. The land was compulso…

SMT. ANURADHA MAHAJAN,,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees bearing ITA Nos

ITA 76/ASR/2006[1988-89]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Dec 2023AY 1988-89

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 45(5)Section 6Section 7(3)

SMT. DHANWANTI DEVI (DECEASED),JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees bearing ITA Nos

ITA 75/ASR/2006[1988-89]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Dec 2023AY 1988-89

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 45(5)Section 6Section 7(3)

Showing 1–20 of 40 · Page 1 of 2