CIT v. Dr. V.V. Modi

218 ITR 1High Court1996#23668 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,460 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Judgments citing CIT v. Dr. V.V. Modi

Mr. Ramender Kumar Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4828/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Mr Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiramender Kumar Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, 5/1240,Vasudhanra, Circle-2, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Pan: Aehpk2428R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 54F

…16/3/1990 should be taken as the date of acquisition by the assessee and the market rate on that date should be taken as cost of acquisition. The ld AO held that the issue is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in 218 ITR 1. Therefore, he held that the assessee has earned short term capital gain. Accordingly, he computed the capital gain at Rs. 234036299/- upheld the action of the ld AO. He further held that even otherwise there is no material on record to show that the plot in question was ever allotted to the assessee by the GDA prior to 12.01.2009 and 04.06.2009. A…

Pradeep Kar, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 596/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Abraham P. Geoergeassessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 48Section 54

…allotment of shares and not from the date of allotment of flat to him. 6. The ld. DR, besides placing reliance upon the order of CIT(Appeals), has invited our attention to the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT V. Dr. V.V. Modi, 218 ITR 1, in which it has been held that the assessee having acquired a site under lease-cum-sale agreement and sold it a few months after becoming absolute owner thereof, the capital gains arising therefrom were short-term capital gains, though assessee held the property for 10 years before conveyance was secured by him upon payment of entire sale consi…

Stewarts & Lloyds of India Limited, Kolkata vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kol - I, Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 372/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2004-05 Stewarts & Lloyds Of India Ltd. -Versus- C.I.T., Circle-1, Kolkata Kolkata (Pan:Aaecs 0445G) (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak, ACA & Shri Prakash Singh,ACAFor Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT.DR

Section 143(3)Section 263

…ownership was acquired by the Assessee only on 19.4.1994 when a registered conveyance was executed in its favour. In coming to the above conclusion, the CIT placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Dr.VV Mody 218 ITR 1 (Karn.) wherein the facts were that the assessee, an individual, was allotted a site by the Bangalore Development Authority on the 25th May, 1972 in accordance with the relevant rules of allotment. A lease-cum-sale agreement was executed according to which the assessee was required to pay a certain amount to the Bangalore Development Authority and…