CIT v. Fair Deal Traders

327 ITR 34High Court2010#24504 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Judgments citing CIT v. Fair Deal Traders

Arun S. Patil, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1224/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(iv)Section 269U

…where a dealer in real estate had received monies in advance from prospective buyers it was found that the Tribunal was justified in concluding that such advance monies could not be treated as income till date of maturing - in CIT Vs Fair Deal Traders (2010) 327 ITR 34 (P&H) after discussion of the case law on the subject including that of the decision in CIT Vs Travancore Rubber & Tea Co. Ltd (1991) 190 ITR 508 (Ker) where the right to receive depended on performance of a conditional obligation as per agreement, the advance cannot have the character of income till such obligation is discharged. It was so decide…

Income-Tax Officer vs. Shri Arun S. Patil, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1204/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(iv)Section 269U

…where a dealer in real estate had received monies in advance from prospective buyers it was found that the Tribunal was justified in concluding that such advance monies could not be treated as income till date of maturing - in CIT Vs Fair Deal Traders (2010) 327 ITR 34 (P&H) after discussion of the case law on the subject including that of the decision in CIT Vs Travancore Rubber & Tea Co. Ltd (1991) 190 ITR 508 (Ker) where the right to receive depended on performance of a conditional obligation as per agreement, the advance cannot have the character of income till such obligation is discharged. It was so decide…

Sh. Ankit Mittal, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

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

ITA 1511/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. V. R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 24(1)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-1’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 1511/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sh. Ankit Mittal, Vs Income Tax Officer, 105, Vidya Enclave, GH-11, Ward-11(1), Gurgaon-122011 Gurgaon (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ALCPM2482P Assessee by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. V. R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.05.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 23.08.2016 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 05.01.2016 of ld. CIT(A)-1, Gurgaon. 2. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “1. On the facts…

CIT v. Fair Deal Traders (327 ITR 34) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax