How many judgments cite CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa?

97 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa (309 ITR 329), spanning 2013 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 54F, Section 234B, Section 54, Section 143(3), Section 234A, Section 234C.

CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa

309 ITR 329High Court2009#1172 most cited

What is CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa authority for?

For exemption under Section 54, the expression 'a residential house' allows for investment in multiple residential units that form one functional unit, as 'a' does not imply a singular number. The amendment to Section 54, effective from April 1, 2015, is prospective.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa · 309 ITR 329 · Section 54 exemption · investment in more than one residential house · meaning of "a residential house" · Section 13(2) General Clauses Act · clubbing adjacent apartments · Section 54 amendment prospective

Also reported as

180 Taxmann 443 Taxmann.com 143

Sections most often in play

Section 54F Section 234B Section 54 Section 143(3)Section 234A Section 234C Section 46A Section 13(2) of the General Clauses Act

Issues it is cited on

section 54(1)section 13(2)long-term capital asset joint development agreement section 54f jda section 54 date of transfer indexed cost of acquisition section 45 fair market value long term capital gain

Judgments citing CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa

Nagaraj Desirazu, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals by the assessees are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes and Stay Petition is dismissed

ITA 449/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S.Padmavathi

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 54Section 54F

…54F is claimed. The same is in violation of proviso to sub-section of section 54F. This is in violation of section 54F of Income tax act. 8. Also, the judicial pronouncements cited by assessee in case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. D Ananda Basappa (2009) 309 ITR 329, Commissioner of Income Tax V/s Gumanmal Jain, (2017) 394 ITR 666 (Madras) have been perused. However, facts of the above cited cases are different from the present one. The judicial pronouncements of Honourable High Court of Karnataka and Honourable High court of Madras pertain to assessment years earlier to A.Y 2015-16 wherein rationale for ter…

Shri Rajeev Nataraj Legal Heir of Late Shri P Nataraj, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-10(2), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 848/BANG/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Rajeev Nataraj, L/H Of Late Shri P Nataraj, No. 63, 1St Cross, The Income Tax Udaya Nagar, Officer, Chikkalsandra, Off Ward 10(2), Uttarahalli Road, Bangalore. Vs. Bangalore – 560 061. Pan: Ahapn9475D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri H. Siva Prasad Reddy, Ar : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 09-02-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-03-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 11/02/2019 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-3, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2008-09 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Impugned Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax [Appeals] U/S 250 Of The Act & That Of The Order Of Assessment Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer Under Section 143[3] R/W 147 Of The Act To The Extent Which Is Against The Appellant Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case. 2. The Order Of Assessment Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer Under Section 143[3] R.W.S 147 Of The Act Is Bad In Law Since The Mandatory Conditions As Envisaged

For Appellant: Shri H. Siva Prasad Reddy, AR

Section 143Section 234Section 250Section 54

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 Shri Rajeev Nataraj, L/H of Late Shri P Nataraj, No. 63, 1st Cross, The Income Tax Udaya Nagar, Officer, Chikkalsandra, Off Ward 10(2), Uttarahalli Road, Bangalore. Vs. Bangalore – 560 061. PAN: AHAPN9475D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri H. Siva Prasad Reddy, AR : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Revenue by CIT (DR) Date of Hearing : 09-02-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 31-03-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is fi…

Arabolu Venkata Naga Deepathi Represented by Power of Attorney Holder, N. Satyaramanujamm, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer(International Taxation), Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed

ITA 178/VIZ/2018[2010-2011]Status: HeardITAT Visakhapatnam28 Mar 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.178/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2010-11) Smt.Arabolu Venkata Naga Deepthi Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. By Power Of Attorney Holder (International Taxation) Smt. N.Satyaramanujam Visakhapatnam Flat No.403, Dhanna Apartments Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Atcpa6413A] (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri I.Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 195Section 201(1)Section 234ASection 54Section 54F

…आयकरअपीलीयअधधकरण, धिशाखापटणमपीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री लधलत कुमार, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.178/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2010-11) Smt.Arabolu Venkata Naga Deepthi Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. By Power of Attorney Holder (International Taxation) Smt. N.Satyaramanujam Visakhapatnam Flat No.403, Dhanna Apartments Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [PAN : ATCPA6413A] (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (…

Jay Narendrakumar Thakkar, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 64/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 64/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Jay Narendrakumar Thakkar, I.T.O., A-503, Sagar Samrat Old Sharda Mandir, Vs. Ward-1(2)(2), Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Aavpt8602J

For Appellant: Shri P. F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.D.R

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ A’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 64/AHD/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Jay Narendrakumar Thakkar, I.T.O., A-503, Sagar Samrat Old Sharda Mandir, Vs. Ward-1(2)(2), Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380006. PAN: AAVPT8602J (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P. F. Jain, A.R Revenue by : Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.D.R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 13/01/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronou…

Shri. P. Krishna Reddy, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1945/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 54F

…the Act. 6.1 In respect of Ground No.4 (supra), learned Authorised Representative for the assessee placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of K.G. Rukminiamma reported in 331 ITR 211 (Kar) and Anand Basappa reported in 309 ITR 329 (Kar). Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of V.R. Karpagam in T.C. (Appeal) No.301/2014 dt.18.8.2014. The learned Authorised Representative submitted that in view of the above judicial pronouncements, the assessee was entitled to claim exemption under Section 54F of the Act in respect of all the…

Fazelaazhar, Ooty vs. ACIT Circle-1, Ooty

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

ITA 425/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

…med the action of the AO despite the fact that following case laws were produced before CIT(A):- (i) Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gumanmal Jain, 394 ITR 666. (ii) Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. D.Ananda Dasappa, (2009) 309 ITR 329 (iii) Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tilok Chand & Sons, (2019) 105 taxmann.com 151 Aggrieved, assessee came in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee relied on the same case laws which were not considere…

Sunandan Kumar Minocha, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-63(1), New Delhi

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3135/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harpal Singh, Senior DR

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 54

…ntial purpose and the amendment brought in the statute w.e.f. 01.04.2015 is not retrospective. Prior to the amendment, there were various judgments wherein favourable view has been taken by the Hon’ble High Courts, viz.,:- • CIT & ANR. vs. D. ANANDA BASAPPA - 309 ITR 329 (Karnataka High Court) Capital gains-Exemption under s. 54-lnvesnnent in more than one residential units/houses - Expression "a residential house" should be understood in a sense that the building should be or residential nature and "a" should not be understood to indicate a singular number- That apart, the apartments purchased by the assessee ar…

Dipti Nalin Parikh, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward - 17(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 3274/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri M Balaganeshdipti Nalin Parikh, Crescent Bay T4 Apt. 3103-3104, Near, Parel Bhoiwada, Opp. Cancer Society, Jeerabai Wadai Road, Parel (E), Mumbai-400012 Pan: Aabpp5053F ............ Appellant Vs. Ito-17(1)(4), 115, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 ............ Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Subramanian, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Sonia Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 54Section 54(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dipti Nalin Parikh, Crescent Bay T4 Apt. 3103-3104, Near, Parel Bhoiwada, Opp. Cancer Society, Jeerabai Wadai Road, Parel (E), Mumbai-400012 PAN: AABPP5053F ............ Appellant Vs. ITO-17(1)(4), 115, 1st Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 ............ Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Subramanian, AR Respondent by : Sh. Sonia Kumar, Sr.DR Date of hearing : 02/12/2021 Date of pronouncement : 09/12/2021 ORDER PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This appeal has been filed by assessee…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Hyderabad vs. Late Shri Ieneni Sripathirao L/R Ieneni Shashikant, Hyderabad

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 1380/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2011-12 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Late Shri Ieneni Income Tax, Sripathirao Circle – 11(1), L/R Ieneni Shashikant, Hyderabad. H.No.5-2-41/20, Seshadri Nagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. Pan : Beeps2654P. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas. Revenue By: Shri T. Sunil Goutam. Date Of Hearing: 23/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2021 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y 2011-12 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 16.07.2019, In Case No.0060/2018-19/Cit(A)-5 Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri T. Sunil Goutam

Section 143(3)Section 54F

…nue’s appeals ITA Nos.732, 889 and 890/Hyd/2019 and corresponding assessee’s Misc. Applications MA Nos.48-50/Hyd/2021; quotes case law CIT Vs. Vittal Krishna, Conjeevaram Vs. ITO 144 ITD 325 (Hyd), CIT Vs. Syed Ali Adil 352 ITR 418 (AP), CIT Vs. Anand Basappa 309 ITR 329, CIT Vs. Gita Duggal 357 ITR 153, Arun K. Thiagarajn Vs. CIT 193 DTR 153, CIT Vs. Gumanmal Jain 394 ITR 666, Tilokchand and Sons Vs. ITO 413 ITR 666 etc to uphold the latter’s claim of section 54F deduction involving other family members. We thus adopt judicial consistency to affirm the CIT(A)’s lower appellate findings under challenge. 5. This…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Hyderabad vs. Panduranga Rao Vaddepally, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 59/HYD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2012-13 Asst. Commissioner Of Bhupathi Rao Income-Tax, Circle – 11(1), Vaddepally, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan-Aoipv 4558A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Asst. Commissioner Of Panduranga Rao Income-Tax, Circle – 11(1), Vaddepally, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan-Anppp 8702J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 54F

…n record. We now consider the case law: 1. CIT Vs. Vittal Krishna Conjeevaram, ITTA No. 588 of 2013, dated 06/12/2013 2. Vittal Kirshna Conjeevaram Vs. ITO, 144 ITD 325 (ITAT, Hyd.) 3. CIT Vs. Syed Ali Adil, 352 ITR 418 (AP – HC) 4. CIT Vs. D. Ananda Basappa, 309 ITR 329 5. CIT Vs. Gita Duggal, 357 ITR 153 6. Arun K. Thiagarajan Vs. CIT, 193 DTR 153) 7. CIT Vs. Gumanmal Jain, 394 ITR 666 8. Tilokchand and Sons Vs. ITO, 413 ITR 189 9. K. Jaipal & Others, ITA NO. 1188/Hyd/2015 and others, dated 19/11/2015. :- 14 -: ITA No. 1826 & 59/Hyd/2019 Bhupathi Ra V and another, Hyd. 4.2 Considering the above judgements cite…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Hyderabad vs. Bhupathi Rao Vaddepally, Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1826/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 54F

Robin Singh Chauhan, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 29(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 7074/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 Robin Singh Chauhan, Vs Acit, 100/1, Gautam Nagar, Circle-29(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaepc9857F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Smt. Rano Jain, Advocate & Shri Venkatesh Chaurasia, Ca Revenue By : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.11.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27Th September, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-10, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Years 2012- 13. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, In Brief Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Derives Income From Long-Term Capital Gain & Other Sources. He Filed His Return Of Income On 28Th July, 2012 Declaring The Total Income At Rs2,61,98,009/- Which Was Processed U/S 143(1). Subsequently, The Case Was Selected For Compulsory Scrutiny Under Cass. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Shown An Income Of Rs.2,46,33,865/- Under The Head ‘Long- Term Capital Gain.’ The Assessee Has Claimed Deduction U/S 54 Of The Act For An Amount Of Rs.2,05,71,400/- On Account Of Investment In Two Properties. The Calculation Of The Cost Of Acquisition Of The New Property As Submitted By The Assessee & Reproduced By The Ao Is As Under:-

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 54

…e assessee. Relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Pawan Arya vs. CIT, reported in (2011) 49 DTR 123 (P&H) and distinguishing the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. D. Ananda Basappa, 309 ITR 329, the AO disallowed the claim of exemption u/s 54 in respect of the second house property for Rs.41,50,000/-. He accordingly made addition of Rs.41,50,000/- to the total income of the assessee. 5. The AO further noted that the assessee has incurred expenses of Rs.54,71,350/- on interior decoration. On being confronted by the AO, it was explained…

S.M. Vinod (Legal Heir of Late Sri. S M Muniyappa), Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 7(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 192/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C. Sandeep, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Besa Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 54Section 54FSection 54F(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2016-17 Sri S.M. Vinod, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, L/R of late S M Muniyappa, Ward 7(2)(1), No.1489, 1st Floor, 40th Cross, Bangalore. 4th T Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore – 560 041. PAN: AFPPM 7315E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri C. Sandeep, CA Respondent by : Smt. Priyadarshini Besa Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 27.10.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 27.10.2021 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member This appeal by th…

Sri Ramaiah Harish, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-7(2)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 789/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Gangadhar Shastry, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh, D.R

Section 54F

…The AO rejected the claim on the basis that the units on the said floors were independent & self-contained and not "a residential house" and granted exemption for only one unit. The CIT(A) and Tribunal upheld the assessee's claim by relying on B.AnandaBasappa 309 ITR 329 (Kar) and K.G. Rukminiamma 331 ITR 211 (Kar). On appeal by the ITA No. 2692/Bang/2018 department, the High Court dismissed the appeal of the revenue. The Hon'ble Court observed that as held in B.AnandaBassappa (SLP dismissed) & K G Rukminiamma, the Revenue's contention that the phrase "a" residential house would mean "one" residential house is no…

B.Sundararajan, Chennai vs. DCIT, Non Corporate Circle, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 95/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 431/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri B. Sundararajan, Income Tax, No. 34, Umapathy Street, Non Corporate Circle 18(1), West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aasps3969C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 95/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2008-09 Shri B. Sundararajan, The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 34, Umapathy Street, Vs. Income Tax, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. Non Corporate Circle 18(1), Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Mrs. V.S. Sreelekha, Cit Assessee By Shri N. Arjunraj, Ca For : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16.09.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai, Dated 31.10.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2

For Respondent: Mrs. V.S. Sreelekha, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

…etter and spirit and, therefore was entitled to the deduction under Section 54 of the Act for the entire investment in the properties and securities. Therefore, in our opinion, Judgment rendered by the Karnataka High Court in CIT Vs. D. Ananda Basappa ((2009) 309 ITR 329 (Karn)) & Khoobchand M.Makhija (supra) cited at bar by the learned counsel for the Assessee apply on all fours to the facts of the present case. 22. The decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court relied upon by the learned counsel for the Revenue, in which the Division Bench of the said Court finding a distinction with D.Ananda Basapaa's case (sup…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Non Corporate Circle 18(1), Chennai vs. Shri. B Sundarajan, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 431/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

For Respondent: Mrs. V.S. Sreelekha, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Warangal vs. Gyana Kumari Rojanala, Warangal

In the result the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1779/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Dr. R. Deepak, D.R

Section 2(47)Section 45Section 53ASection 54Section 54F

…of 22 apartments and 8 duplex houses with total constructed area of 63417 sq. ft. Out of this the appellant's share was 47% for duplex houses and 36.5% for residential apartments. The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT Vs Anand Basappa [2009] 309 ITR 329 1180 Taxman 4(Kar.), held that Section 54 makes it apparent that the proceeds should be invested in a residential house. However, ITA no. 1779/Hyd/2019 Gyana Kumari Rojanala, Warangal AY 2016-17 it being a beneficial provision, it should be construed liberally and the deduction cannot be restricted. In this context, the appellant during the cou…

Madhu B Khatri, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 32 (2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s claim of deduction is allowed

ITA 6613/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Confirming The Sale Consideration Determined By Ld. Ao On Adopting The Market Value Of 2 Residential Flats, Ought To Have Considered The Understated Facts, Being;

Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 54Section 541

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 6613/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Vs. ITO,Ward-32(2)(2) Madhu B.Khatri A-301, Bathia Building C-11, R.No.304, 3rd Floor No.1, S.V.Road Pratyakshkar Bhavan Borivali(W) BKC, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400092 Mumbai-400 051 PAN : AITPK8826F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala Department by Ms. Usha Gaikwad Date of Hearing 18.05.2021 Date of Pronouncement 01.07.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-…

ITO Non Corp Ward 15 (3), Chennai vs. Smt. Mayuri Atul Shah, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 453/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 453/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 The Income Tax Officer, Smt. Mayuri Atul Shah, Non Corporate Ward 15(3), Vs. Flat No. 802, Building F, Waterfront Chennai 34. Condominium, Behind Nittro Gym, Kalyaninagar, Pune 411 006. [Pan:Aacpa1988P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vilesh Dalya, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.04.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.06.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai, Dated 29.11.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2009-10 In Directing The Assessing Officer To Allow The Deduction Under Section 54 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Vilesh Dalya, C.A

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 50CSection 54

…able long term capital gain was arrived at ₹.3,80,13,202/-. Accordingly, excess claim of exemption under section 54 of the Act of ₹.9,11,300/- was brought to tax. On appeal, by following the decision in the case of CIT v. D. Ananda Basappa (2009) 180 Taxman 4/309 ITR 329 (Kar.) as well as the decision in the case of CIT v. V.R. Karpagam (2015) 373 ITR 127 (Mad), the ld. CIT(A) allowed both the grounds raised under section 54 of the Act and directed the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction claimed under section 54 of the Act for investment of long term capital gain in both the flats. 3 I.T.A. No. 453/Chny/18…

Sh. Valmik Thapar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeals are disposed of by this common order as indicated above

ITA 5767/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Acit, 19, Kautilya Marg, Circle-53(1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Valmik Thapar, Vs. Dcit, M/S. R. N. Khanna & Company, Ca, Circle-32(1), 14-15F, Shivam House, Connaught New Delhi Place, New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Shri Valmik Thapar, Circle-53(1), 19, Kautilya Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacpt7098K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Senior Advocate Along With Shri Shailesh Gupta, Shri Mahur Agarwal, Advocates Revenue By: Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11/06/2021 (Last Hearing) Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2021. O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, A. M. 1. These Are Three Appeals For Two Assessment Years Pertaining To One Assessee, Mr. Valmik Thapar, A Resident, Individual [Assessee]. Assessee Filed Ita Number

For Appellant: Shri Salil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 143Section 147Section 54Section 54E

…ligible for deduction u/s 54 of the income tax act. He submitted that the issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Honorable Karnataka High court Commissioner of Income-tax v. D. Ananda Basappa* [2009] 180 Taxman 4 (Karnataka)/[2009] 309 ITR 329 (Kar) [2009] 180 Taxman 4 (Karnataka) and G.Chinnadurai v. Income-tax Officer, Income-tax Department Non-Corporate Ward 13(2), Chenn 74 taxmann.com 227 (Madras). He submitted that facts of the case before us are identical. He therefore submitted that reason which is not in consonance of the decision it cannot be a reason for reopening of the asse…