CIT v. Chandni Bhuchar

323 ITR 510High Court2010#6640 most cited

What is CIT v. Chandni Bhuchar authority for?

The valuation adopted by a State Agency for stamp duty purposes does not automatically substitute the actual sale consideration unless supported by admissible evidence. The Assessing Officer must present positive evidence for the stamp duty valuation.

17

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Chandni Bhuchar · 323 ITR 510 · stamp duty valuation · sale consideration · actual sale consideration · admissible evidence · Assessing Officer · positive evidence · State Agency valuation · property sale

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 132Section 132(4)Section 292CSection 69Section 131(1A)Section 132(4A)Section 50C

Issues it is cited on

section 38onus of proofsection 153a(1)(a)section 144basection 91circle ratepanchnamasection 56(2)(vii)(b)section 65bfull value of considerationsection 158bcsection 65

Judgments citing CIT v. Chandni Bhuchar

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Third Floor vs. Rama Shankar Khemka, Ganesh Bazar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1005/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…588 (P&H) Paramjit Singh vs. ITO (extracted at page 316 of Paper Book) iii) 316 ITR 46 (Del) CIT vs. Shankutla Devi (extracted at page 317 of Paper Book) iv) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. Asstt. CIT vi) 250 ITR 484 (P&H) CIT vs. Satinder Kumar vii) 323 ITR 510 (P&H) CIT vs. Chandni Bhuchar viii) 49 SOT 732 (Chd) Subash Chand vs. Asstt. CIT 35 THAT MESSAGE EXCHANGED ON SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS SUCH AS 'WHATSAPP CHAT HAS NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE i) Civil Appeal No.. 9346 OF 2019 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No(s) 23194 of 2019 Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprise Ltd. v. KS Infraspace LLP Ltd. has held that whatsapp…

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Third Floor vs. Rajesh Rani Khemka, Ganesh Bazar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1004/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…588 (P&H) Paramjit Singh vs. ITO (extracted at page 316 of Paper Book) iii) 316 ITR 46 (Del) CIT vs. Shankutla Devi (extracted at page 317 of Paper Book) iv) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. Asstt. CIT vi) 250 ITR 484 (P&H) CIT vs. Satinder Kumar vii) 323 ITR 510 (P&H) CIT vs. Chandni Bhuchar viii) 49 SOT 732 (Chd) Subash Chand vs. Asstt. CIT 35 THAT MESSAGE EXCHANGED ON SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS SUCH AS 'WHATSAPP CHAT HAS NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE i) Civil Appeal No.. 9346 OF 2019 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No(s) 23194 of 2019 Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprise Ltd. v. KS Infraspace LLP Ltd. has held that whatsapp…

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Income Tax Department vs. Payal Khemka, K

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1000/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…588 (P&H) Paramjit Singh vs. ITO (extracted at page 316 of Paper Book) iii) 316 ITR 46 (Del) CIT vs. Shankutla Devi (extracted at page 317 of Paper Book) iv) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. Asstt. CIT vi) 250 ITR 484 (P&H) CIT vs. Satinder Kumar vii) 323 ITR 510 (P&H) CIT vs. Chandni Bhuchar viii) 49 SOT 732 (Chd) Subash Chand vs. Asstt. CIT 35 THAT MESSAGE EXCHANGED ON SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS SUCH AS 'WHATSAPP CHAT HAS NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE i) Civil Appeal No.. 9346 OF 2019 (arising out of SLP (Civil) No(s) 23194 of 2019 Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprise Ltd. v. KS Infraspace LLP Ltd. has held that whatsapp…

Sachin Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 59/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…use, there can be wide variations in the prices of land. However, circle rates disregard all these factors and adopt a uniform rate for all properties in that particular area. 8. Reliance is placed to the decision in the case of CIT v. Chandni Bhuchar [2010] 323 ITR 510/191 Taxman 142 (Punj. & Har.) in which it has been held that the valuation done by the state agency for the purpose of stamp duty would not ipso facto substitute the actual sale consideration as being passed on to the seller by the purchaser in the absence of any admissible evidence. 9. Reliance is also placed to the decision in the case of Pr. C…

Kamal Kant Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 53/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…use, there can be wide variations in the prices of land. However, circle rates disregard all these factors and adopt a uniform rate for all properties in that particular area. 8. Reliance is placed to the decision in the case of CIT v. Chandni Bhuchar [2010] 323 ITR 510/191 Taxman 142 (Punj. & Har.) in which it has been held that the valuation done by the state agency for the purpose of stamp duty would not ipso facto substitute the actual sale consideration as being passed on to the seller by the purchaser in the absence of any admissible evidence. 9. Reliance is also placed to the decision in the case of Pr. C…

M/S Standard Frozen Foods Exports Pvt Ltd, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 45/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…use, there can be wide variations in the prices of land. However, circle rates disregard all these factors and adopt a uniform rate for all properties in that particular area. 8. Reliance is placed to the decision in the case of CIT v. Chandni Bhuchar [2010] 323 ITR 510/191 Taxman 142 (Punj. & Har.) in which it has been held that the valuation done by the state agency for the purpose of stamp duty would not ipso facto substitute the actual sale consideration as being passed on to the seller by the purchaser in the absence of any admissible evidence. 9. Reliance is also placed to the decision in the case of Pr. C…

Kiran Ashok Desai, Mumbai vs. The PCIT Mumbai-19, Mumbai

In the result, Ground raised by the assessee is allowed and order passed by the Ld

ITA 1794/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyalkiran Ashok Desai, D-3, Triveni Building, 66 Walkeshwar Road, Maharashtra 400 066 Pan: Aabpd6275H ..... Appellant Vs. Pcit R. No. 617, 6Th Floor, Piramal Chamber, Lal Baug, Parel, Mumbai- 400 012 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Gunjan Kakkad, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 50CSection 56(2)Section 56(2)(x)

…vanath Infra v. ACIT [2021] 123 taxmann.com 252 (Mumbai - Trib.) Maria Fernandes Cheryl v. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation) 10. We further rely upon the ruling of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chandani Bhuchar [2010] 323 ITR 510/191 Taxman 142 (Punjab & Haryana) for the preposition that “The valuation done by any State Agency for the purpose of stamp duty would not ipso facto substitute the actual sale consideration as being passed on to the seller by the purchaser in the absence of any admissible evidence. The Assessing Officer is obliged to bring on record positive evi…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-4(2), Central Range-4, Mumbai vs. M/S Neev Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1537/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Hakani, Ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 37(1)

…vanath Infra v. ACIT [2021] 123 taxmann.com 252 (Mumbai - Trib.) Maria Fernandes Cheryl v. Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation) 20. We further rely upon the ruling of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chandani Bhuchar [2010] 323 ITR 510/191 Taxman 142 (Punjab & Haryana) for the preposition that “The valuation done by any State Agency for the purpose of stamp duty would not ipso facto substitute the actual sale consideration as being passed on to the seller by the purchaser in the absence of any admissible evidence. The Assessing Officer is obliged to bring on record positive evi…

M/S. Ravi Developments, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle -2, Mumbai

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

ITA 2928/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Ravi Developments 76, Laxmi Palace, Mathuradas Road, Kandivali (West) Mumbai-400 067 Pan: Aaafr2516G ...... Appellant Vs. Acit Cc – 2, Ashar It Park, 6Th Floor, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane Thane- 400 064 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Jain, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 250Section 43CSection 50C

…rnational Taxation) 8. As far as balance transactions of Table-2 at Page No.6 of the assessment order at serial no. 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 are concerned we rely upon the ruling of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chandani Bhuchar [2010] 323 ITR 510/191 Taxman 142 (Punjab & Haryana) for the preposition that “The valuation done by any State Agency for the purpose of stamp duty would not ipso facto substitute the actual sale consideration as being passed on to the seller by the purchaser in the absence of any admissible evidence. The Assessing Officer is obliged to bring on record positive evi…

Shri Narendra Tripathi, Bhopal vs. The DCIT-Central-1, Bhopal

In the result the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

ITA 300/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

For Appellant: S/Shri Ashish Goyal &For Respondent: Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT
Section 132Section 153ASection 69B

…his books of account. It is only then that the burden shifts to the assessee to furnish a satisfactory explanation. Till the initial burden is discharged by the Assessing Officer, the section remains dormant” Further in case of CIT vs. Chandni Bhuchar (2010) 323 ITR 510 (High Court of Punjab & Haryana), order of Tribunal was upheld which stated that “in absence of any legally acceptable evidence, valuation done for the purpose of Section 50 C would not represent actual consideration passed on to seller”. Smt. Seema Tripathi & Narendra Tripathi IT(SS)Nos.101to102/Ind/2017,IT(SS)Nos.115to119/Ind/17&ITA.No.300/Ind…

Smt.K.B.Sony, Cochin vs. The DCIT, Cochin

In the result, i) The appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 320/COCH/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 69

…h) (ii) CIT vs. Satinder Kumar (2001) 250 ITR 485 (P&H (iii) CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 263 ITR 354 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2006) 282 ITR 259 (Mad) (v) CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2007) 294 ITR 49 (SC) (vi) CIT vs. Chandni Buchar (2010) 323 ITR 510 (P&H) (vii) Paramjit Singh vs. ITO (2010) 323 ITR 588 (P&H) (viii)Rajdeep Builders vs. ACIT in ITA No.666/CHD/2010 dated 27/04/2012 (ITAT Chandigarh Bench) 2.4 On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that the claim of the assessee was based on general observations. The Ld. DR submitted that while the Assessing Officer relied upon the specific i…

K.R.Jayaram, Chennai vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1698/CHNY/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Mr.Arjunraj, C.A ""For Respondent: Mr.K.Ravi, JCIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘ C’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1698/Mds./2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2009-10 Shri K.R.Jayaram, Vs. The ACIT, 4/50,Thriu Vee Ka Street, NC Circle-2, Villankuruchi Post, Coimbatore. Coimbatore 641 035. [PAN AFEPJ 8078 A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.Arjunraj, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Mr.K.Ravi,…

International Ships Stores Supplieres, Mumbai vs. JCIT RG 13(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2502/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu() & Shri Ravish Sood () Assessment Year: 2009-10 International Ships Stores Suppliers Vs. Jcit, Range 13(2) 101, Navratan, 69 P.D. Mello Road Mumbai 1St Floor, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai Pan No. Aaafi0135Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Mr. Deepak Traslhawala Assessee By : Mr. Javed Akhtar Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/10/2016

For Appellant: Mr. Javed AkhtarFor Respondent: Mr. Deepak Traslhawala
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…ansaction is established, then the onus cast on the assessee stands discharged and no adverse inference as regards such transactions can be drawn, relied on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of: CIT Vs. Chandni Bhuchar (2010) 323 ITR 510 (P&H), and submitted that now when in the present case the genuineness of the purchase transactions had been established and accepted by the lower authorities, therefore no disallowance u/s 40A(3) w.r.t such purchases was liable to be made. 6. That on the other hand the Ld. Departmental representative (for short „D.R‟) heavily relied on the orde…

S.M. Chandrashekar, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1060/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Dr.K. Shankar Prasad, JCIT (D.R)
Section 23(1)(c)Section 50C

…28.6.2007. The Assessing Officer made an addition on account of difference in the purchase consideration and stamp duty valuation of the property. The learned Authorised Representative has relied upon the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Chandni Buchar (2010) 323 ITR 510 (P&H) and submitted that the deeming provision of section 50C cannot be applied in the hand of the purchaser. He has further pointed out that amendment in section 56(2)(vi) of the Act was brought vide Finance Act, 2009 dt.1.4.2010. Therefore, for the year under consideration no addition can be made on account of difference in purchase considerati…

R.G. Bulchandani, Mumbai vs. ITO 1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 1180/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1180/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Shri R.G. Bulchandani, Income Tax Officer – बनाम/ A/21, Darshan Apartments, 1(3)(1) V. Mount Pleasant Road, Mumbai. Mumbai – 400006. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aadpb0862E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 251(1)(a)Section 271Section 3Section 45Section 50CSection 68

…is a forest land with low commercial value and the same was not considered by the DVO in right perspective. .The ld counsel for the assessee relied upon decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Chandni Bhochar reported in (2010) 323 ITR 510(P&H HC) to contend that the value adopted by stamp duty authorities if it is in excess of actual sale consideration also cannot be accepted unless there is positive evidence brought by AO supporting the price adopted by the State Government for the purposes of stamp duty and that the tax-payer has paid anything more than actual consideration as d…

ACIT 21(1), Mumbai vs. Nirmal B Thakkar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4136/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4135/Mum/2010 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08) The Asstt. Commissioner Of बनाम/ M/S Dayal Bapulal Thakkar (Huf), Income Tax 25(2), A-10, Charan Saran, Vile Parle Vs. (Erstwhile Acit-21(1), ) Model Town Co-Op Hsc, Room No.711, C-12, 7Th Floor, Gulmohar X Road No.7, Juhu, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Mumbai-400049 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 45(2)Section 48

…hat passed between the parties is a question of fact to be determined in each case, having regard to the facts and circumstances of that case.” Identical view has been expressed by the Hon‟ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chandni Buchar (323 ITR 510). 14. A perusal of the report given by the approved valuer would show that the valuer has stated that the land is located in residential cum commercial zone and all the facilities/civic amenities like schools, hospitals, offices, markets, cinemas etc. are available in the vicinity. The valuer has also pointed out that the plot is having good fron…

ACIT 21(1), Mumbai vs. Dayal Bapulal Thakker, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4135/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4135/Mum/2010 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2007-08) The Asstt. Commissioner Of बनाम/ M/S Dayal Bapulal Thakkar (Huf), Income Tax 25(2), A-10, Charan Saran, Vile Parle Vs. (Erstwhile Acit-21(1), ) Model Town Co-Op Hsc, Room No.711, C-12, 7Th Floor, Gulmohar X Road No.7, Juhu, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Mumbai-400049 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 45(2)Section 48

…hat passed between the parties is a question of fact to be determined in each case, having regard to the facts and circumstances of that case.” Identical view has been expressed by the Hon‟ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chandni Buchar (323 ITR 510). 14. A perusal of the report given by the approved valuer would show that the valuer has stated that the land is located in residential cum commercial zone and all the facilities/civic amenities like schools, hospitals, offices, markets, cinemas etc. are available in the vicinity. The valuer has also pointed out that the plot is having good fron…

CIT v. Chandni Bhuchar (323 ITR 510) — Cited in 17 Judgments | BharatTax