CIT v. Gurunath Talkies

328 ITR 59High Court2010#13074 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also reported as

189 Taxmann 171

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 45Section 45(3)Section 45(4)Section 9B

Judgments citing CIT v. Gurunath Talkies

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Manikandan, Chennai

ITA 2986/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2986/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai. Manikandan, Vs. No.15/16/17, Vision Towers, 2Nd Floor, Yogam Garden, Valasarvakkam, Chennai - 600 087. Pan: Behpm 6583A (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By Mr. R. Sivaraman, Advocate Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 11.02.2026 16.02.2026 Per Padmavathy.S, A.M: आदेश / Order This Appeal By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short "Cit(A)") Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short "The Act") Dated 26.08.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. The Assessee Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Ld Cit(A) Is Contrary To Law & Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2 The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Made By The Ao Of An Amount Of Rs.2,98,29,315/- Credited In Assessee'S Capital Account By M/S Crcl Llp, In Which Assessee Is A Partner, For Sacrificing / Relinquishing - 2 -:

Section 147Section 2Section 2(14)Section 2(47)Section 250Section 45Section 45(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'C' BENCH: CHENΝΑΙ श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं सुश्री पदमावती यस, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. PADMAVATHY.S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2986/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle-4(1), Chennai. Manikandan, Vs. No.15/16/17, Vision Towers, 2nd floor, Yogam Garden, Valasarvakkam, Chennai - 600 087. PAN: BEHPM 6583A (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Assessee by प्रत्यर्थी क…

Indian Extrusions, Mumbai vs. ACIT 24(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1994/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh () & Shri Ravish Sood () M/S Indian Extrusions Acit-24(3) B-316/317, Virwani Industrial Vs. Mumbai. Estate,Western Express Highway, Goregaon East, Mumbai – 400 063 (Assessee) (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 45(4)

…was recategorized as unsecured loans. ITA No.1994/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2010-11 8 M/s Indian Extrusions Vs. ACIT-24(3) 8.2 It is also required to be noted that the Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Davangere Vs. Gurunath Talkies (2010) 328 ITR 59 (Karnataka) had taken similar stance. The facts of this case were as under: In this case the firm was carrying on the business of maintaining a qnema theatre, comprising of four partners who were entitled to share the profits of the firm. A reconstitution of the partnership firm took place by addition of two partners to the partnership firm and th…

Anik Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 40, Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 7189/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7189/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) M/S. Anik Industries Ltd. Dcit-Central Circle -40 बनाम/ 610, Tulsiani Chambers Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm-2696-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5234/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) M/S. Anik Industries Ltd. Dcit-Central Circle -40 बनाम/ 610, Tulsiani Chambers Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm-2696-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 17/01/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 19/03/2020 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…y inducting them, they are also entitled to interest in the said assets and therefore, the said judgment has no application to the facts of this case. 20. Further, reliance was placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT v. Gurunath Talkies [2010] 328 ITR 59 / 189 Taxman 171, where it was held as follows: - "Section 47 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was introduced to take out certain transactions which otherwise are transfers of capital assets and otherwise taxable under section 45, from being taxed. On the reintroduction of sub-sections (3) and (4) by the Finance Act, 1987 in section 45 clause (ii) of…

Mdlr Estates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8215/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…ship firm is capital asset and on retirement of the firm there is capital gain which accrues to the assesse which is taxable as such. For the above proposition he relied on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court of CIT Vs. Gurunath Talkies reported in 328 ITR 59 (Karnataka) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. A. K. Naik Associates reported in 265 ITR 346. He however noted from the retirement deed dated 28.11.2007 between M/s. MDLR Estate Private Limited, M/s. MDLR Builders Private Limited, Mr. Gopal Kumar, M/s. Vatika Limited and Mr. Anil Bhalla that sum infused by M/s…

Mdlr Builders P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8214/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…ship firm is capital asset and on retirement of the firm there is capital gain which accrues to the assesse which is taxable as such. For the above proposition he relied on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court of CIT Vs. Gurunath Talkies reported in 328 ITR 59 (Karnataka) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. A. K. Naik Associates reported in 265 ITR 346. He however noted from the retirement deed dated 28.11.2007 between M/s. MDLR Estate Private Limited, M/s. MDLR Builders Private Limited, Mr. Gopal Kumar, M/s. Vatika Limited and Mr. Anil Bhalla that sum infused by M/s…

Electroplast Engineers, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 24(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5363/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri P MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri Neil Philip
Section 143(3)Section 45(4)

…1 Electroplast Engineers आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “जी” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI "ी िड. क"नाकर राव, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी अिमत शु"ला, "याियक सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. : 5363/Mum/2014 (Assessment year : 2010-11) Electroplast Engineers, Vs Asst. Commissioner of 142 Garuda House, Income Tax -24(3), Upper Govind Nagar, Malad (East), Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Mumbai -400 097 C-1, 7th Floor, "थयी लेखा सं.:PAN: AAAFE 7927 N Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai -400 051 अपीलाथ" (Appellant ""य…

The Commr of Income Tax vs. M/S Dynamic Enterprise

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/1414/2006HC Karnataka16 Sept 2013

Bench: This Bench.

Section 148Section 2(47)Section 45(4)

…conflict between the proposition of law laid down in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mangalore Ganesh Beedi Works reported in (2004) 265 ITR 658 and in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax And Another Vs. Gurunath Talkies reported in (2010) 328 ITR 59. In order to resolve the said conflict, this matter was referred to the Full Bench by order dated 31.07.2012. On such reference, 3 Hon’ble Chief Justice has passed an order on 27.08.2013 directing the matter to be listed before this Bench. SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW 2. The substantial questions of law referred for our con…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S.Gayathri Enterprises

ITA/274/2004HC Karnataka04 Jul 2012

Bench: B.MANOHAR,D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR

Section 260Section 260ASection 45

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2012 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D V SHYLENDRA KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B MANOHAR Income Tax Appeal No.274 of 2004 C/w Income Tax Appeal No.68 of 2010 and ITA CROB No. 1 of 2005 in Income Tax Appeal No.274 of 2004 In ITA No. 274 of 2004: BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CENTRE CIRCLE-2(1) C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE … APPELLANTS [BY SRI M V SESHACHALA & SRI K V ARAVIND, ADVS.] 2 AND: M/S. GAYATHRI ENTERPRISES NO.160, (OL…

CIT v. Gurunath Talkies (328 ITR 59) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax