CIT v. Ghanshyam Das (HUF)

224 CTR 522Supreme Court of India2009#12469 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 145B(1)Section 194LASection 23Section 28

Judgments citing CIT v. Ghanshyam Das (HUF)

KRISHAN PAL SINGH HUF,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1268/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: the Ld CIT (Appeals).

For Appellant: Shri N. K. Agarwal, CA &For Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28

…ble or not. The appellant hereby submits Paras nos. from the relevant Cases Laws being relied upon by the Appellant as part and parcel of his written submission being submitted in support of his appeal. [2009] 182 taxman 368(SC)/ [2009] 315 ITR 1(SC) / [2009] 224 CTR 522 (SC) [16-07-2009] SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Commissioner of income tax, Faridabad v. Ghanshyam (HUF) S.H KAPADIA AND AFTAB ALAM, JJ. CIVIL APPEAL NOS.4401 TO 4420, 4422 TO 4426 OF 2009 JULY 16, 2009 8 Krishan Pal Singh vs. ITO Section 45 read with section 155 of the income tax act 1961 and Sec 23, 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 capit…

ITO, REWARI vs. SH. RAMSARUP SAINI HUF, REWARI

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2571/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kantasstt. Year: 2011-12 Ito Ramsarup Saini Huf Ward-2 Konsiwas Road Rewari 123 401 Rewari Pan Aaihr3464F Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 143(2)Section 145ASection 28Section 34Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU,JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITO Ramsarup Saini HUF Ward-2 Konsiwas Road Rewari 123 401 Rewari PAN AAIHR3464F Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by: Shri C.P. Singh, Sr. DR Assessee by : None Date of Hearing 27/02/2019 Date of 28/02/2019 pronouncement O R D E R PER O.P. KANT, A.M This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated 25/02/2015 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-Rohtak [in short the Ld. CIT(A)] for assessment year 2011-12 raising follow…

ADIT, NEW DELHI vs. MR. SUDHIR CHOUDHARY, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 2013/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantasstt. Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Smt. Jyoti Narula, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…d. Assessing Officer. The Ld. DR also filed written submission supporting the finding of the Assessing Officer relying on decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in following cases : 1. CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) [2009] 182 Taxman 368 (SC)/[2009] 315 ITR 1 (SC)/{2009} 224 CTR 522 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Govinda Choudhury & Sons [1994] 74 Taxman 331 (SC)/[1993] 203 ITR 881 (SC)/[1994] 116 CTR 61 (SC) 3 5. On the contrary, Ld. Counsel of the assessee filed a paper book containing pages 1 to 63. She referred to page 21 of the paper book containing details of the total compensation received including interest and the treatment of th…

SANJAY NIVRUTI BARURE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3,, LATUR

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

ITA 1726/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1724/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 145ASection 148Section 23Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

…2) Act, 2009. AO also analysed the provisions of section 23(1A), 28 and 34 of Land Acquisition Act, 1984 and held that these amounts are chargeable to income tax. AO also analysed the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Ghanshyam Das (HUF) 224 CTR 522, Manjet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh Vs. Union of India 65 taxman.com 160, Sunderlal and another Vs. UOI and others vide CWP No.2014 of 2015, dated 21-09- 2015 and eventually held as under : “12. Decision : Viewed in this context, in section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the aim, scope and object of the income chargeable to tax under the head “i…

HARISHCHANDRA NIVRUTI BARURE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3,, LATUR

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

ITA 1725/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1724/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 145ASection 148Section 23Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

…2) Act, 2009. AO also analysed the provisions of section 23(1A), 28 and 34 of Land Acquisition Act, 1984 and held that these amounts are chargeable to income tax. AO also analysed the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Ghanshyam Das (HUF) 224 CTR 522, Manjet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh Vs. Union of India 65 taxman.com 160, Sunderlal and another Vs. UOI and others vide CWP No.2014 of 2015, dated 21-09- 2015 and eventually held as under : “12. Decision : Viewed in this context, in section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the aim, scope and object of the income chargeable to tax under the head “i…

RAMCHANDRA NIVRUTI BARURE,,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3,, LATUR

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

ITA 1724/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1724/Pun/2017 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 वष"

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 145ASection 148Section 23Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

…2) Act, 2009. AO also analysed the provisions of section 23(1A), 28 and 34 of Land Acquisition Act, 1984 and held that these amounts are chargeable to income tax. AO also analysed the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Ghanshyam Das (HUF) 224 CTR 522, Manjet Singh (HUF) Karta Manjeet Singh Vs. Union of India 65 taxman.com 160, Sunderlal and another Vs. UOI and others vide CWP No.2014 of 2015, dated 21-09- 2015 and eventually held as under : “12. Decision : Viewed in this context, in section 56(2)(viii) of the Act, the aim, scope and object of the income chargeable to tax under the head “i…

SHRI RAJENDER SINGH,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, FARIDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 473/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishirajender Singh, Vs. Ito, Sanmarks & Associates-B-504, Ward-1(5), 1St Floor, Nehru Ground, Nit, Faridabad Faridabad Pan: Caeps1217D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 28Section 34Section 45Section 45(5)

…order of the ld CIT(A) is erroneous. 6. The ld DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. 7. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Ghanshyam Dass (HUF) 224 CTR 522 (SC) has held that interest received by the assessee u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is a part of enhanced value of land and therefore, is part of land compensation only. Therfore it emerges that Interest received by the assessee u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is part of the compensation and is not in the nature of the interest. Therefore…

SHRI DHARAM PAL,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, FARIDABAD

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

ITA 1840/DEL/2014[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Smt Diva Singh

Section 144

…it was submitted that the grounds were required to be amended in view of the fact that subsequent to the filing of the original grounds the assessee became aware of the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of CIT versus Ghanshyam Das (HUF) (2009) 224 CTR 522 (SC). As a result of this the grounds had to be amended. It was also the submission that fresh evidences in support of the claim had to be filed which were also rejected by the CIT(A). In the circumstances it was his limited prayer that the Revenue may be directed to decide the issue in accordance with law taking into consideration the relevant…

CIT v. Ghanshyam Das (HUF) (224 CTR 522) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax