How many judgments cite CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini?

228 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini (398 ITR 531), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 48, Section 2(47), Section 2(47)(v).

CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini

398 ITR 531Supreme Court of India2017#384 most cited

What is CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini authority for?

A transfer of immovable property, for the purpose of capital gains under section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act, occurs only when the agreement allowing possession in part performance of a contract is a registered instrument, as mandated by Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.

228

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

Balbir Singh Maini · section 2(47)(v) · section 53A Transfer of Property Act · unregistered development agreement · joint development agreement · capital gains · transfer of immovable property · date of transfer · registration requirement · part performance

Also reported as

86 Taxmann.com 94251 Taxmann 20212 SCC 354

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 48 Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 53A Section 45

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(47)(v)section 53a section 53 section 2(47)jda joint development agreement section 49 right to receive project completion method transfer of capital asset section 45 date of transfer

Judgments citing CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini

ABC INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2673/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Apr 2026AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Abc India Limited Dcit, Circle 11(1) 40/8, Ballygunj, Circular Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Chowringhee Kolkata, West Bengal-700019 Square, Kolkata-700069 Vs. West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacca2035J Assessee By : Shri S.K. Pransukhka, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.04.2026

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Pransukhka, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjib Kumar Paul, DR

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14A

…struing any provision of the Act, more particularly, when one is concerned with exemption from payment of tax. A similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini [2017] 86 taxmann.com 94/251 Taxman 202/398 ITR 531 (SC) (SC). In the said case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court took note of the various clauses in section 2(47) of the Act and what was relevant in the said case was clause (vi) and the Hon'ble Supreme Court did not agree with the view taken by the High Court and held that under section 2(47)(vi), any transaction which has the effect of transferring or…

ALLRUI SRINIVAS RAJU,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1923/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1923/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2016-17) Allrui Srinivas Raju, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Circle-12(1), Pan: Ahepr6968H Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) करदाताका""त"न"ध"व/ : Shri K C Devdas, Ca Assessee Represented By राज"वका""त"न"ध"व/ : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr Department Represented By सुनवाईसमा"तहोनेक""त"थ/ : 12/03/2026 Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/ : 18/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Allrui Srinivas Raju, (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 17/10/2025 For The A.Y.2016-17. Allrui Srinivas Raju Vs. Dcit 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Rounds Of Appeal:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad "ी "वजय पाल राव, उपा" य" एवं "ी मधुसूदन साव"डया, लेखा सद" य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1923/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2016-17) Allrui Srinivas Raju, Vs. DCIT, Hyderabad. Circle-12(1), PAN: AHEPR6968H Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) करदाताका""त"न"ध"व/ : Shri K C Devdas, CA Assessee Represented by राज"वका""त"न"ध"व/ : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR Department Represented by सुनवाईसमा"तहोनेक""…

SHRI N G CHANDRA REDDY (HUF) vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms

ITA/637/2016HC Karnataka05 Feb 2026

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

Section 148Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 234ASection 260Section 53A

…ra). It is to be noted that subsequent to the said decision, the legal position has undergone significant development in view of the pronouncements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Balbir Singh Maini, reported in (2017) 398 ITR 531 (SC), and Seshasayee Steels (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Company Circle VI(2), Chennai, reported in (2020) 421 ITR 46 (SC). 8. A comprehensive reading of the JDA prima facie indicates that there was a transfer within the meaning of Section 2(47)(v) of the IT Act. The Assessing Officer has placed reliance on the GPA e…

MR POPATRAO DASHRATHRAO SURYAWANSHI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(4), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 234/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 Mr. Popatrao Dashrathrao Suryawanshi Ito, Ward 7(4), Pune S.No.38, Tingre Nagar, Havaldar Mala, Vs. Vishrantwadi, Pune – 411015 Pan: Adhps2643F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora Department By : Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 19-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-01-2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 45(2)Section 54BSection 54F

…per book, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew the attention of the Bench to para 6 of the order where the Assessing Officer has mentioned as under: 12. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Balbir Singh Maini reported in 398 ITR 531 (SC), he submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that registered development agreement with possession constitutes transfer within meaning of section 2(47) of the Act. He submitted that the purpose of assessment proceedings before the taxing authorities is to assess the correct tax liability of an assessee in accord…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. AADHITYA FINCORP PVT LTD, CHENNAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 659/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.TFor Respondent: Ms. N. V. Lakshmi, Advocate

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 153CSection 40A(3)Section 69A

…re are not justified. Reliance is placed on judicial precedents such as: CIT v. Sigma Paints Ltd. (1991) 188 ITR 7 (Bom), where it was held that an ad-hoc disallowance is not permissible without proper examination of evidence. CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini (2017) 398 ITR 531 (SC), emphasizing that additions must be based on tangible evidence and not on guesswork. 6.5.7 In light of the above, the undersigned is of the view that the AQ has not identified any specific defect in the appellant's books of account, nor has any expenditure been found to be non-genuine or non-business in nature Accordingly, the disallowance o…

AMIT KUMAR VERMA,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6(1), PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 357/PAT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

…2(47)(v) will come into play and capital gain tax liability arises in the hands of the land owner in the year in which the LDA is entered into, and the possession of immovable property is handed over. 6.5 The Supreme Court in CIT vs. BALBIR SINGH MAINI [2017] 398 ITR 531 (SC), held that in order to qualify as a "transfer of a capital asset u/s. 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 there must be a "contract" which can be enforced in law u/s. 53A of the 1882 Act. It is also observed that in order to attract Section 53A of TOPA, the following conditions need to be fulfilled: 1. There should be a contract for conside…

SANJAY DUTT,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1857/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं.1857/िद"ी/2022(िन.व. 2018-19) Sanjay Dutt, Bl Gupta & Co. 103 Ff, Caxton House, Khandewalan Extn., New Delhi 110055 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan No: Aeqpd-5870-F बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ....."ितवादी/Respondent Circle 1(2)(2), New Delhi 110002

For Appellant: Ms. Manju Goel & Shri B.L Gupta, Chartered AccountantsFor Respondent: Shri M.S Nethrapal, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 53A

…t of assessee’s return of income for AY 2019-20 along with the computation. The ld. AR contended that since the Development Agreements were not registered, the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision in the case of CIT vs. Balbir Singh Maini, 398 ITR 531 (SC). 3. Per contra, Shri M.S Nethrapal representing the department vehemently defending the assessment order submitted that as per assessee’s own admission, the assessee has received consideration amounting to Rs.3.39 crores during FY 2017-18. The assessee ought to have offered the same to tax in his return of income for AY 2018-19. No such inco…

M/S ESTIN TIE UP PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the two cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 32/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 50C(1)Section 55A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 32/KOL/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Estin Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-1(2), Vs. Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCE4623R ITA No.: 141/KOL/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 A.C.I.T., Central Circle-1(2), M/s. Estin Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCE4623R Appearances: Assessee represented by : S.M. Surana, Adv. Department represented by : Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT(DR). Date of concluding the hearing : 29-August…

A.C.I.T.,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S ESTIN TIE UP PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the two cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 141/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 50C(1)Section 55A

FULLERTON FINANCIAL HOLDINGS PTE. LTD.,SINGAPORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CIRCLE 2(3)(1) - MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 1137/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Smt. Renu Jauhri ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 153

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 1137/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Fullerton Financial Vs. The Assistant Holdings Pte. Ltd. Commissioner of 18-06 UIC Building, 5 Income- Shenton Way, tax(International Singapore-68808 Taxation) Circle PAN:AADCF7364A 2(3)(1)-Mumbai KautilyaBhavan C-41 to C-43, G Block BandraKurla Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by ShriPorus Kaka, Divesh Chawla, Manish Kanth Respondent by Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT D.R. Date of Hearing…

SHARDINDU PRASAD SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 630/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…he had also written to the Ld. AO for the rest of the document. The assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Balbir Singh Maini [2017] 86 taxmann.com 94 (SC)/[2017] 251 Taxman 202 (SC)/[2017] 398 ITR 531 (SC)/[2017] 298 CTR 209 (SC)[04-10-2017] stating that the income accrues to the assessee only if the right to receive the income exists and as the JDA was not registered, the contract cannot be enforced. But the Ld. CIT(A) did not agree with the submission of the assessee and confirmed the addition. It was also stated that a second set of order w…

MODULE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 10(2),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1792/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT-DR

Section 2(47)Section 45Section 48

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.1792/KOL/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-2021) Module Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, NFAC/ITO Ward-10(2), P-240, Lake Road, Kolkata Kolkata-700029 PAN No. :AAGCM 8216 P (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Praveen Kishore, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 13/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 13/10/2025 आ…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. RAJA RAO PARACHURI, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 374/VIZ/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.374/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Raja Rao Parachuri, Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aatpp2493B (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: P. Murali & Co राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 07/08/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 08/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm :

For Appellant: P. Murali & CoFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)(v)Section 53A

…registered JDA has no efficacy in law for purposes of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, TPA, and, thus, cannot trigger Section 2(47)(v) of the Act, had relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Balbir Singh Maini (2017) 398 ITR 531 (SC). 4. However, we find that the A.O. was not persuaded to subscribe to the claim of the assessee. The A.O. relied on Clause 17 of the JDA, which envisaged handing over of possession to the developer for commencing and completing construction, and invoked Section 2(47)(v) of the Act r.w. Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 ("TPA"…

SUVARNA CHANDRAKANT BHOJANE,MUMBAI vs. ITO 42(3)(4), MUMBAI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1997/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Suvarna Chandrakant Bhojane Ito 42(3)(4) Flat No. 401, 4Th Floor, Wadhwa Kautilya Bhavan Group, Boulevard-3, Lbs Marg Vs. Bandra Kurla Ghatkopar West, Mumbai-400 Complex, Bandra-E 086. Mumbai-400 051. Pan : Agipb2777K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali AafaquiFor Respondent: Shri S.C. Agarwal

Section 2(47)(vi)Section 50C

…amount received is the same, i.e., another 50% of compensation, the Revenue cannot take different stand. The Ld. CIT(A) who gave relief to her husband relied on the ratio of decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Balbir Singh Maini 12 SCC 354 and held that section 2(47)(vi) of the Act and its definition of “transfer” is applicable to transfer of immovable properties and not the transfer of title. In the impugned case, what was transferred is title of right in the land and the amount received is in lieu of extinguishment of right to transfer the title. In view of the decision rendered b…

DEVI DAYAL,KAITHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , KAITHAL

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 899/CHANDI/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Sept 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 899/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Devi Dayal, Vs The Ito, Pundri Anaj Mandi, Ward – 1, Kaithal-Haryana 136026. Kaithal. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aajpd5851H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…gements : 1. CIT Vs Najoo Dara Deboo 218 taxman 473 Allahabad HC 2. Aarti Sanjay Kadam vs ITO 172 ITD 362 Mumbai ITAT 3. Seshasayee Steels (P) Ltd. vs ACIT 421 ITR 46 Supreme Court 4. C.S. Atwal vs. CIT 59 taxmann.com 359 P&H HC 5. CIT VS. Balbir Singh Maini 398 ITR 531 Supreme Court 6. CIT vs Atam Prakash Sons 219 CTR 164 Delhi HC 7. K. Radhika vs DCIT 149 TTJ 736 Hyderabad ITAT 8. K.V. Satish Babu [HUF] vs. ITO 37 NYPTTJ 802 Bangalore ITAT 9. PCIT vs Fardeen Khan 411 ITR 533 Bombay HC 10. R. Gopinath (HUF) vs. ACIT 133 TTJ 595 Chennai ITAT 11. Alapati Venkataramiah vs. CIT 57 ITR 185 SC 12. Abdul Rashid vs Bid…

SELINA N. SHETH ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -17(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the ground No

ITA 2352/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Selina N. Sheth Ito, Ward – 17(3)(1), M/S. Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road, Esplanade House, 2Nd Floor, Mumbai – 400020. 29 Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400001. [Pan: Aabps9851L] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 10(38)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 254(1)Section 57

…be taxed as income from other sources, deduction was required to be allowed for a single premium of Rs. 20.00 lakhs in 2011, following the “real income” theory. To support such contention, he relied on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Balbir Singh Maini 398 ITR 531. The ld AR of the assessee prayed to allow his appeal on his primary submissions. In support of additional grounds of appeal, the ld AR of the assessee submits that in case any tax liability is determined, the credit of TDS reflected in Form-26AS be allowed to the assessee. Or in case, no liability is determined, it may be allowed as refund.…

OLYMPUS REALTORS (P) LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, GURGAON

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1207/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Amisha S. Gupta, CIT-DR

Section 153C

…unted for the income accrued from the collaboration agreements in its income tax returns for any of the AY. However, ld. Counsel has argued that these collaboration agreements are unregistered and in view of the decision of Supreme Court in Balbir Singh Maini 398 ITR 531 (SC) (CLC 176-187), Suraj Lamps vs State of Haryana (SC) (CLC 188-196), Sanjay Sharma (SC) (CLC 197-213), no right accrues to the assessee. In any case the 10 subject matter is immovable property which do not become property of the assessee only on the basis of occupation certificate issued in the name of Bestech and Orient Craft. We appreciate t…

KAMLESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

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

ITA 147/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraι.Τ.Α. No.: 147/Pat/2025

Section 144Section 250

…ich cannot be sustainable under the provisions of law. And, in support of the above facts and law of the present case the Appellant places strong reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT VS. Balbir Singh Maini [4th OCT. 2017] [398 ITR 531 (SC)] (Copy of Judgement Enclosed) 10. The Appellant most humbly submits here and your honour would also appreciate this fact that since the execution of the said "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT" on 24-03-2015, there were always certain glitches and mess in the said project in terms of its existence itself either there was a court litigation or whether it…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 05 , DELHI vs. DEEPAK KOTHARI , KANPUR

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

ITA 1834/DEL/2021[20017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 49(4)Section 56(2)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Deepak Kothari, vs. ACIT, Central Circle – 5, 24/19, The Mall Kanpur, New Delhi. Kanpur – 208 011 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AAYPK6101C) ACIT, Central Circle – 5, vs. Deepak Kothari, New Delhi. 24/19, The Mall Kanpur, Kanpur – 208 011 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AAYPK6101C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 05.06.2025…

DEEPAK KATHARI,KANPUR vs. ACIT, CC-5, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1205/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 49(4)Section 56(2)(vii)

Showing 1–20 of 228 · Page 1 of 12

...