CIT v. Mohakapur Ice and Cold Storage: 281 ITR 354~(A1I.) Bhogilal H. Patel v. CIT

107 ITR 677High Court1997#13252 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Judgments citing CIT v. Mohakapur Ice and Cold Storage: 281 ITR 354~(A1I.) Bhogilal H. Patel v. CIT

GORDON BRUCE SERRAO,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -28, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3105/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram a/wFor Respondent: Shri M. Daya Sagar
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

…[2017] 396 ITR 244 (Bom.); viii) CIT v/s Nirav Modi, [2017] 390 ITR 292 (Bom.); ix) CIT v/s Reliance Communication Ltd., [2017] 244 Taxman 55 (SC); x) CIT v/s Paville Fashhions Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 398 ITR 603 (Bom.); xi) CIT v/s Anandlal Becharlal & Co., [1997] 107 ITR 677 (Bom.); xii) CIT v/s Sun Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd., [1992] 198 ITR 297 (SC); xiii) Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v/s CIT, [2000] 243 ITR 83 (SC); xiv) Venkatakrishna Rice Co. v/s CIT, [1987] 163 ITR 129 (Mad.); xv) Bismillah Trading Co. v/s IO, [2001] 248 ITR 292 (Ker.); xvi) Smt. Tara Devi Aggarwal v/s CIT, [1973] 88 ITR 323 (SC); xvii) Thalibai…

SUNITA ADUKIA,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-2, RANCHI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 15/RAN/2018[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Oct 2019

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Ranjan Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 54

…sions including the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Saroj Kumar Mazumdar vs CITA, 37 ITR 242 (SC), in the case of Janaki Ram, Bahadur Ram vs CIT, 57 itr 21 (SC) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anandlal Becharlal & co. 107 ITR 677 (Bom), ld A.R. submitted that the nature of transaction must be determined on consideration of all the facts and circumstances, which are brought on record of the authorities below. Ld A.R. submitted that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Janaki Ram Bahadur Ram (supra) has held that the transaction of purchase of land cannot be assumed with…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI RANJIT HANMANTRAO MOHITE,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1253/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav BathamFor Respondent: Shri Sanket Joshi
Section 143(3)

…y with the intention to resell at a profit. Hence it was held that looking at the intention, even though it was an isolated transaction it was in nature of adventure of trade and could be taxed as business Income. In the case of CIT Vs Anandlal Bechartal & Co.107 ITR 677 (Bom.) land was purchased to construct houses for the partners which were the original intention thereafter, due to adverse circumstances the land was sole on profit. The assessee claimed it to be 'adventure in the nature of trade.The assessee’s claim was rejected holding that initially the land was not acquired for 'business' but, was acquired f…

ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD vs. M/S. AMRIT CORP LTD., GHAZIABAD

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5337/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Rohit Garg, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, DR
Section 45(2)

…assessee at the time of purchase of an asset-whether the same was to be held as “capital asset” or as “stock-in-trade”:- CIT v. Mohakapur Ice and Cold Storage: 281 ITR 354~(A1I.) Bhogilal H. Patel v. CIT: 74 ITR692 (Bom.) CIT v. Anandlal Becharlal & Co.: 107 ITR 677 (Bom.) CIT v. B.K. Bhaumik: 245 ITR 614 (Del.) 16 I.T.A. No. 1789, 4579, 5337, 2163/Del/2011 Assessment years: 2007-08, 2008-09 Marudhar Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT: ITA No. 75/Ju./2012 3.014 The Ld. AR submitted that in light of the aforesaid facts and legal position and also applying the ratio of decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in…

AMRIT CORP LTD.,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4579/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Rohit Garg, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, DR
Section 45(2)

…assessee at the time of purchase of an asset-whether the same was to be held as “capital asset” or as “stock-in-trade”:- CIT v. Mohakapur Ice and Cold Storage: 281 ITR 354~(A1I.) Bhogilal H. Patel v. CIT: 74 ITR692 (Bom.) CIT v. Anandlal Becharlal & Co.: 107 ITR 677 (Bom.) CIT v. B.K. Bhaumik: 245 ITR 614 (Del.) 16 I.T.A. No. 1789, 4579, 5337, 2163/Del/2011 Assessment years: 2007-08, 2008-09 Marudhar Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT: ITA No. 75/Ju./2012 3.014 The Ld. AR submitted that in light of the aforesaid facts and legal position and also applying the ratio of decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in…

ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD vs. M/S AMRIT CORP LTD., GHAZIABAD

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2163/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Rohit Garg, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, DR
Section 45(2)

…assessee at the time of purchase of an asset-whether the same was to be held as “capital asset” or as “stock-in-trade”:- CIT v. Mohakapur Ice and Cold Storage: 281 ITR 354~(A1I.) Bhogilal H. Patel v. CIT: 74 ITR692 (Bom.) CIT v. Anandlal Becharlal & Co.: 107 ITR 677 (Bom.) CIT v. B.K. Bhaumik: 245 ITR 614 (Del.) 16 I.T.A. No. 1789, 4579, 5337, 2163/Del/2011 Assessment years: 2007-08, 2008-09 Marudhar Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT: ITA No. 75/Ju./2012 3.014 The Ld. AR submitted that in light of the aforesaid facts and legal position and also applying the ratio of decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in…

AMRIT CORP LTD.,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1789/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Rohit Garg, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, DR
Section 45(2)

…assessee at the time of purchase of an asset-whether the same was to be held as “capital asset” or as “stock-in-trade”:- CIT v. Mohakapur Ice and Cold Storage: 281 ITR 354~(A1I.) Bhogilal H. Patel v. CIT: 74 ITR692 (Bom.) CIT v. Anandlal Becharlal & Co.: 107 ITR 677 (Bom.) CIT v. B.K. Bhaumik: 245 ITR 614 (Del.) 16 I.T.A. No. 1789, 4579, 5337, 2163/Del/2011 Assessment years: 2007-08, 2008-09 Marudhar Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT: ITA No. 75/Ju./2012 3.014 The Ld. AR submitted that in light of the aforesaid facts and legal position and also applying the ratio of decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in…

CIT v. Mohakapur Ice and Cold Storage: 281 ITR 354~(A1I.) Bhogilal H. Patel v. CIT (107 ITR 677) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax