How many judgments cite CIT v. Kuldeep Singh?

24 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Kuldeep Singh (49 Taxmann.com 167), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Kuldeep Singh come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 54, Section 143(3), Section 2(47), Section 250, Section 45, Section 53A.

CIT v. Kuldeep Singh

49 Taxmann.com 167High Court2014#4939 most cited

What is CIT v. Kuldeep Singh authority for?

Section 54 of the Income-tax Act allows deduction for purchase of a residential house even if the transaction involves an agreement with a builder, payment linked to construction stages, and possession is obtained later, as the term 'purchased' has a wider connotation beyond a registered sale deed or immediate possession.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kuldeep Singh · section 54 · section 53A · date of transfer · long-term capital asset · capital gains · residential property · agreement with builder · purchase of flat · prescribed period · Transfer of Property Act

Also reported as

270 CTR 561226 Taxmann 133

Sections most often in play

Section 54 Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 250 Section 45 Section 53A Section 139 Section 144B

Issues it is cited on

section 54(1)purposive interpretation long-term capital asset date of transfer section 54 section 45 long term capital gain previous year transfer prescribed section 250 person

Judgments citing CIT v. Kuldeep Singh

ITO Ward-53(3), New Delhi vs. Anju Madhan, New Delhi

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

ITA 9321/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 53ASection 54

…ITA No. 9321/Del/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.9321 /Del./2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Income Tax Officer Vs. Anju Madhan Ward-53(3), E-108, Malcha Marg, New Delhi Diplomatic Enclave Chhanakya Puri, Delhi 110021 New Delhi PAN: AALPM2084K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri I.P.Bansal, Adv. Shri Vivek Bansal, Adv. Shri Vishal Chechi, Adv. Revenue by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date of Pronouncement 13/03/2026 ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM The Revenue has…

Arvinder Singh Sahni, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 13(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal is allowed

ITA 6778/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Jagadish

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Punjabi, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan (Sr. DR.)

Section 250Section 54

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. No.6778/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Arvinder Singh Sahni, 23 Deputy Commissioner of 23, Shree Industrial Income-tax, Circle – Premises, 2nd Hasnabad Vs. 13(2)(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Lane, Santacruz (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai – Mumbai – 400050. 400020. (Appellant) : (Respondent) PAN No. AAVPS 3529 D Present for: Assessee by : Ms. Ritu Punjabi, Ld. Adv Revenue by : Shri Surendra Mohan (Sr. DR.) Date of Hearing : 17.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 12.03.2026…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Meerut vs. Prem Sapra, New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1739/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 143(3)Section 54

…1 ACIT v. Prem Sapra A.Y. 2021-22 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2021-22 ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs Prem Sapra, Meerut. C-763, New Friends Colony, New Delhi-110025. PAN: ACWPS 9855 P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Sanjeev Sapra, Adv. & Shri Sandeep Sapra, Adv. Department represented by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of hearing 01.04.2025 Date of pronouncement 20.06.2025 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeal filed by the revenue is dir…

ACIT, Circle, Shimla vs. Shri Vinod Sharma, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1449/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1449/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Acit, Vs. Shri Vinod Sharma, बनाम B-1/3, Circle, Safdarjang Enclave, Shimla New Delhi 110029 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abkps1560N अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent (Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate With Shri Ahninav Bazwaria, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2024

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Mohan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & DR KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1449/CHD/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 The ACIT, Vs. Shri Vinod Sharma, बनाम B-1/3, Circle, Safdarjang Enclave, Shimla New Delhi 110029 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ABKPS1560N अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT (HYBRID MODE ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate With Shri Ahninav Bazwaria, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR सुनवाई क"…

Sheela Ramchand Uttamchandani, Mumbai vs. ITO-30(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3398/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54

…. Therefore, the view taken by the Tribunal is not correct. Hence, we answer the question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.” 15. The learned AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v/s Kuldeep Singh, (2014) 270 CTR 561 (Del.), wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that intention behind section 54 of the Act is to give relief to a person who has transferred his residential house and has purchased or constructed another residential house. The Hon’ble High Court further held that it is only the excess amount not used for making a purchase or construction of th…

Indumati Chintakuntala, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 2033/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 54

…on the ground that the construction of the residential house was not complete within the time is depleted by law? This issue is no longer res integra. While placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kuldeep Singh 270 CTR 561 (Del), a Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal held the issue in favour of the assessee in the case of Sri Hasmukh (supra). For the sake of ready reference we deem it just and necessary to extract the relevant portions of the order in the case of Sh. Hasmukh (supra), hereunder:- 7.1. The controversy is as to whether under these facts assessee can be…

Diwakar Reddy Chintakuntala, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 1560/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 54

Maharshi Gogineni, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1644/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, AR

Section 54F

…4F of the Act on the ground that the construction of the property was not complete or that the title was not passed within the time is depleted by law? While placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kuldeep Singh 270 CTR 561 (Del), a Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal held the issue in favour of the assessee in the case of Sri Hasmukh (supra). For the sake of ready reference we deem it just and necessary to extract the relevant portions of the order in the case of Sh. Hasmukh (supra), hereunder:- Page 3 of 8 7.1. The controversy is as to whether under these facts as…

Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC-1(4), Kolkata

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed”

ITA 1209/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 234ASection 53ASection 54

…ITA No. 1209/KOL/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia =-IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 1209/KOL/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia,......................................................Appellant 34, Pankaj Mallick Sarani, Jayantika Apartment, 1s t Floor, Kolkata-700019 [PAN:AHFPS8270A] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,..................................Respondent Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3 rd Floor, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur vs. Shri Radheshyam Agrawal, Raipur

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 32/RPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.32/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. Radheshyam Agrawal 27/B, Ankit Choubey Colony, Raipur (C.G.). Pan : Aczpa6544J ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Amit M Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 17Section 2(47)(v)Section 49Section 53ASection 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.32/RPR/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/s. Radheshyam Agrawal 27/B, Ankit Choubey Colony, Raipur (C.G.). PAN : ACZPA6544J ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by :Shri Amit M Jain, CA Revenue by :Shri P.K Mishra, CIT-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 29.07.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Pronouncement : 23.09.2022…

Ajai Mittal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 30(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 6998/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2014-15 Ajay Mittal, Vs. Acit, Circle 30(1), F-33, Tara Apartments, New Delhi. Alaknanda, New Delhi-1100 19

Section 48Section 54Section 54(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ajay Mittal, Vs. ACIT, Circle 30(1), F-33, Tara Apartments, New Delhi. Alaknanda, New Delhi-1100 19 PAN :AAKPM9813H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Arun Khanna, CA Respondent by Mrs. Suman Malik, Sr. DR Date of hearing 31.03.2022 Date of pronouncement 19.04.2022 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Captioned appeal by the assessee arises out of order dated 21.08.2018 of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals)-10, New…

Chander Kanta Maheshwari L/H of Late Shri Ashok Kumar Maheshwari, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 35(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Assesseeis allowed

ITA 448/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaa N D Shri N. K. Choudhry(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Ms. Sangeeta Yadav, Sr.D.R

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 54Section 54(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A N D SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 448/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Smt. Chander Kanta Income Tax Officer, Maheshwari, Legal Heir of Late Vs. Shri Ashok Kumar Maheshwari, Ward : 35 (2), 35/11, Shakti Nagar, Delhi –110 007. New Delhi. PAN: AAGPM0302F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : N o n e; Department by: Ms. Sangeeta Yadav, Sr.D.R. Date of Hearing : 20/12/2021 Date of pronouncement : 19/01/2022 O R D E R PER N. K. CHOUDHRY, J. M. 1. Thisappea…

Mrs. Indu Kamlesh Jain, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT -2, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 843/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nikhil Chaudhary, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

…ingh (2014) 270 CTR (Del) 561 : (2014) 108 DTR (Del) 161 and Khemchand Fagwani vs. ITO (ITA No. 7876/Mum/2010, dt. 10th Sept., 2014) followed.” We also draw strength from the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kuldeep Singh (2014) 270 CTR 561 (Del), wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that: “Section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Profit on sale of property used for residential house (Purchase) - Whether where assessee having sold residential property, entered into an agreement with a builder within prescribed period of two years for purchase of flat payment of…

Naina Saraf, Jaipur vs. Pr.CIT-2, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 271/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 271/Jp/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Cuke Naina Saraf, Pr.Cit-2, Vs. B-93, Surya Marg, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Aevps 4665 N Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

…ngh (2014) 270 CTR (Del) 561 : (2014) 108 DTR (Del) 161 and Khemchand Fagwani vs. ITO (ITA No. 7876/Mum/2010, dt. 10th Sept., 2014) followed.” We also draw strength from the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kuldeep Singh (2014) 270 CTR 561 (Del), wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that: “Section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Profit on sale of property used for residential house (Purchase) - Whether where assessee having sold residential property, entered into an agreement with a builder within prescribed period of two years for purchase of flat payment o…

Sh. Rajendra Joshi, Noida vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 982/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mathur, AdvFor Respondent: Sri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 54

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.982/Del/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rajendra Joshi vs ITO B-707, Gatway Apartments, Ward – 68(2) Sector 51 New Delhi Noida 201301 PAN No AFRPJ1417L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Abhishek Mathur, Adv Department by: Sri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing: 06-08-2020 Date of Pronouncement: 14-08-2020 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM Aggrieved by the order dated 30/11/2016 by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, New…

Kusumlata Sonthalia, Kolkata vs. Principal CIT, Central - 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1151/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1151/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri RadheyShyam, CIT DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 263Section 54Section 54F

…OT206 (Mumbai) Sri Ved Prakash Rakhra vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, iii) Circle-6(1), Bangalore (ITAT) iv) Mrs. Jyoti Arun Kothari VITO, (TS-737-ITAT-2014(Mum) v) CIT V Smt. Brinda Kumari (2001) 114 Taxmann 266(Del.) vi) CIT v Kuldeep Singh (2014) 49 Taxmann.com 167 (Del.) vii) Farida A Dungurpurwala v ITO (2014) 52 Taxmann.com 227 (Mum. Tribunal) In the above cases, the competent courts have held that the flates constructed by the private developers are also covered by Circular 471 & 672 and, therefore, entitled for deduction u/s 54. The most question is whether the agreement with builder to purchase…

Keshav Dutt Shreedhar, Shimla vs. DCIT, Shimla

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8/CHANDI/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Vishal MohanFor Respondent: Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 54

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए”, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH "ीमती "दवा "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं, एवं "ीमती अ"नपूणा" गु"ता, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 8/CHD/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year. : 2008-09 Shri Keshav Dutt Shreedhar, The DCIT, बनाम S/o Shri Brahm Dutt Sharma, Circle, VS Legalies Near Marina, Shimla. The Mall, Shimla (HP). "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: ADXPS6141G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Vishal Mohan राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Chander…

Anand Jitendra Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 18(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-2013

ITA 5369/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anand Jitendra Shah, The Assistant Commissioner Of Sdc Exports, 122A, Dutta Income Tax- 18(1), Manditr Compound, Thakurdwar Income Tax Office, 2Nd Floor, Road, Vs. Ernest House, Mumbai - 400002 Nariman Point, Mumbai - 4000021 Pan: Anqps6808R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Apurva M. Shah (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Satish Chandra Rajore & Chaitanya Anjaria (Drs) Date Of Hearing: 28/06/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2019

For Appellant: Shri Apurva M. Shah (AR)For Respondent: Shri Satish Chandra Rajore

Section 143Section 50CSection 54F

…said issue after taking into consideration, the principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. T.N. Arvinda Reddy 120 ITR 46, Sanjeevlal Vs. CIT 46 taxman.com 300, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kuldeep Singh 270 CTR 561 (Delhi). 10. Admittedly, in the present case the assessee sold his share in the property referred above to SDC Developers and in lieu of the same, the assessee was to receive two residential flats with inter connected staircase and Rs. 25 lacs in cash. For calculating the capital gains, the assessee took the stamp duty valuation rate as full valu…

Chinnappa Anthonappa, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 663/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139Section 147Section 45Section 54B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2010-11 Chinnappa Anthonappa, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Doraisanipalaya Bilekahalli, Income Tax, Bannerghatta Road, Circle 10(1), Bangalore – 560 076. Bangalore. PAN: ALUPA 9484B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri B.S. Balachandran, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Vikas Suryavamshi, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 23.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 31.07.2019 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan, Vice President This appeal by th…

Shantanu Kumar Bose, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 33(1), New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 3051/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 54ESection 54F

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3051/DEL/2018 (A.Y 2015-16) Shantanu Kumar Bose Vs ACIT B-9/6263, Vasant Kunj, Circle-33(1) New Delhi Block E-2, Pratyaksha Kar AFXPB1157P Bhawan, Civic Centre, (APPELLANT) Delhi-110002 (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. S. S. Khan, CA Respondent by Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DRs Date of Hearing 13.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement 03.06.2019 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 29/12/2017 passed by CIT(A)…