CIT v. Asoka Marketing Ltd. (137 ITR 350)

M J ASSOCIATES,PALAKKAD vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1, PALAKKAD

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

ITA 785/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sriram A.S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

…and cannot be brought to tax. Reliance in this regard can be made on following decisions: - M.J. Associates i) CIT vs. hiralal Motilal Mody [1981]131 ITR 421 (Guj.) ii) CIT vs. Asoka Marketing Ltd. [1987] 164 ITR 664 (Cal.) iii) CIT vs. Dhanraj Dugur [1982] 137 ITR 350 (Cal.) 14. Therefore, the compensation received by the appellant firm for entering into the termination agreement is not taxable as the same is in the nature of capital receipt. Accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities are hereby set aside and direct the AO to delete the addition. 15. As regards the submission of the ld. CIT-DR for rema…

M J ASSOCIATES,PALAKKAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, PALAKKAD

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

ITA 784/COCH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sriram A.S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…and cannot be brought to tax. Reliance in this regard can be made on following decisions: - M.J. Associates i) CIT vs. hiralal Motilal Mody [1981]131 ITR 421 (Guj.) ii) CIT vs. Asoka Marketing Ltd. [1987] 164 ITR 664 (Cal.) iii) CIT vs. Dhanraj Dugur [1982] 137 ITR 350 (Cal.) 14. Therefore, the compensation received by the appellant firm for entering into the termination agreement is not taxable as the same is in the nature of capital receipt. Accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities are hereby set aside and direct the AO to delete the addition. 15. As regards the submission of the ld. CIT-DR for rema…

JAIKISHIN ATALRAM RUPANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 23 (2), MUMBAI

In the result, ground no.1

ITA 6856/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

Section 54Section 54F

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) I.T.A. No. 6856/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year 2012-13) Shri Jaikishan Atalram Rupani ACIT 23(2) Vs. 6th floor, Makhija Chamber Matru Mandir 196, Turner Road, Bandra (W) Tardeo Mumbai-400 050. Mumbai 400 007. PAN : AAIPR5741F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Lipsa A. Chanchlani Department by Shri R. Bhoopathi Date of Hearing 12.12.2019 Date of Pronouncement 17.02.2020 O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(A) dated 24.9.2018 and pertains to A.Y. 2012-13. 2. Grounds of appeal r…

SHRI GIRISH P. RUPANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 23(1), MUMBAI

In the result, ground no.1 of the appeal is

ITA 1028/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanshri Girish P. Rupani Acit-23(1) Room No. 122, 1St Floor, Makhija Chambers, 196, Turner Road, Bandra (W), Matru Mandir, Grant Road, Mumbai-400050. Mumbai-400007. Vs. Pan: Aaapr6723P Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri S.M. Makhija (C.A.) Respondent By : Shri S.K. Mishra (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 05.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2019

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Makhija (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri S.K. Mishra (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 54Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Shri Girish P. Rupani ACIT-23(1) Room No. 122, 1st Floor, Makhija Chambers, 196, Turner Road, Bandra (W), Matru Mandir, Grant Road, Mumbai-400050. Mumbai-400007. Vs. PAN: AAAPR6723P Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri S.M. Makhija (C.A.) Respondent by : Shri S.K. Mishra (Sr. DR) Date of Hearing : 05.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 10.04.2019 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against t…

ITO, WARD-3(3),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SHRI K V V PRASAD,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 457/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.375/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Smt.Siripurapu Chinatalli Ward-3(3) D.No.9-16-37/2 Visakhapatnam Gurajada Enclave Cbm Compound Visakhapatnam [Pan : Agrpc1150E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.457/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Shri K.V.V.Prasad Ward-3(3) Plot No.301, Vytla Residency Visakhapatnam Balajinagar Siripuram Visakhapatnam (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2019 : 13.02.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR

Section 271(1)(c)

…. Fortuna Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. Do not constitute taxable capital gains in view of the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs B.C. Srinivas Setty (1981) 128 ITR 294 (SC) and followed in CIT Vs. Dhanaraj Dugar(1982) 137 ITR 350 (Cal). Another angle to the issue is that the right under an agreement of sale 15 I.T.A. Nos.375/Viz/2017 and 457/Viz/2017 Smt. Siripurapu Chinatalli and Shri K.V.V.Prasad, Visakhapatnam is a mere right to specific performance or a right to sue and therefore not transferable u/s. 6(e) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and hence such right d…

ITO, WARD-3(3),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SIRIPURAPU CHINATALLI,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 375/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.375/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Smt.Siripurapu Chinatalli Ward-3(3) D.No.9-16-37/2 Visakhapatnam Gurajada Enclave Cbm Compound Visakhapatnam [Pan : Agrpc1150E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.457/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Shri K.V.V.Prasad Ward-3(3) Plot No.301, Vytla Residency Visakhapatnam Balajinagar Siripuram Visakhapatnam (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2019 : 13.02.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR

Section 271(1)(c)

…. Fortuna Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. Do not constitute taxable capital gains in view of the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs B.C. Srinivas Setty (1981) 128 ITR 294 (SC) and followed in CIT Vs. Dhanaraj Dugar(1982) 137 ITR 350 (Cal). Another angle to the issue is that the right under an agreement of sale 15 I.T.A. Nos.375/Viz/2017 and 457/Viz/2017 Smt. Siripurapu Chinatalli and Shri K.V.V.Prasad, Visakhapatnam is a mere right to specific performance or a right to sue and therefore not transferable u/s. 6(e) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and hence such right d…

KHODAY ESHWARSA & SONS,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1117/BANG/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri. Sunil Kumar Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sukumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sibichen K. Mathew, CIT -III

Section 263

…ncome or capital gains. Reliance was placed on the following judgments : i) CIT v. Hiralal Manilal Mody [131 ITR 421] (Guj) ii) CIT v. Vishaka Marketing Ltd [(1987) 164 ITR 664] iii) Salgaonkar Mining Industries v. CIT [228 ITR 183] iv) CIT v. Dhanraj Dugar [137 ITR 350] (Cal) v) CIT v. Mrs. Grace Collis & Others [248 ITR 323] (SC) vi) S. Zoraster & Co. V. CIT [322 ITR 35] (Raj) vii ) Travancore Rubber & Tea & Co. Ltd v. CIT [243 ITR 158] (SC) viii) CIT v. D. P. Sandu Bros. Chembur P. Ltd [273 ITR 1] (SC) ix) Syndicate Bank Ltd v. ACIT [(1985) 155 ITR 68] Further according to him there could be no capital gains…

CIT v. Asoka Marketing Ltd.

Sections most often in play

Judgments citing CIT v. Asoka Marketing Ltd.