CIT v. P.J. Thomas

211 ITR 837High Court#23619 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing CIT v. P.J. Thomas

Shri Shri Ketan Moolchand Shah, Bhilai, Bhilai(Cg) vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, -2(1), Bhilai, Bhilai(Cg)

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 34/BIL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur01 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2008-2009 Assessment Year: 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)

…mitted that the area is not under the coverage of Muncipal area and is situated beyond 8 kilometres from the Raipur. The assessee to support its claim of agricultural land relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. P.J. Thomas, 211 ITR 837 (Mad), wherein, it was held that the exclusion u/s.2(14)(iii) does not apply Asse ssment Year : 20 08- 200 9 ITA No .19 / Rpr/20 16 A sse ss ment Year: 2010 -2011 to agricultural lands situated within Panchayats, hence capital gain arising from transfer of such agricultural land is not liable to tax. The Assessing Officer was not satisfied wi…

Shri Shailesh Arvind Shah, Bhilai(Cg) vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 2(1), Bhilai(Cg)

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 28/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur01 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2008-2009 Assessment Year: 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)

…8 kilometres from the Raipur. The assessee to support its claim of agricultural land relied on the decision of Asse ssment Year : 20 08- 200 9 ITA No .28 / Rpr/20 16 A sse ss ment Year: 2010 -2011 Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. P.J. Thomas, 211 ITR 837 (Mad), wherein, it was held that the exclusion u/s.2(14)(iii) does not apply to agricultural lands situated within Panchayats, hence capital gain arising from transfer of such agricultural land is not liable to tax. The Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanations and dealt on the provisions and factual aspects and observed that…

Shri Ketan Moolchand Shah, Bhilai(Cg) vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Bhilai(Cg)

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 19/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur01 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2008-2009 Assessment Year: 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)

…mitted that the area is not under the coverage of Muncipal area and is situated beyond 8 kilometres from the Raipur. The assessee to support its claim of agricultural land relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. P.J. Thomas, 211 ITR 837 (Mad), wherein, it was held that the exclusion u/s.2(14)(iii) does not apply Asse ssment Year : 20 08- 200 9 ITA No .19 / Rpr/20 16 A sse ss ment Year: 2010 -2011 to agricultural lands situated within Panchayats, hence capital gain arising from transfer of such agricultural land is not liable to tax. The Assessing Officer was not satisfied wi…

CIT v. P.J. Thomas (211 ITR 837) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax