CIT v. Ramakrishnan

363 ITR 59High Court2014#5150 most cited

What is CIT v. Ramakrishnan authority for?

For the purpose of computing the holding period for capital gains tax, the relevant date for determining the acquisition of property is the date of allotment, not the date of registration of the conveyance deed.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ramakrishnan · section 54 · section 54F · capital gains · holding period · date of allotment · conveyance deed · long term capital gain · short term capital gain · acquisition date

Also reported as

48 Taxmann.com 55

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(14)short term capital gainlong term capital gaintransferbusinesssection 143(3)total income

Judgments citing CIT v. Ramakrishnan

Mr. Keshab Chandra Jain, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3767/DEL/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyay: 2001-02 Sh. Keshab Chandra Jain Vs. Acit, Circle Noida C/O S.Ramanand Aiyar & Co. C.As Noida 708, Surya Kiran Bldg. 19, Kasturba Gandhi Marg New Delhi 110 001 Pan: Abupj 6333 Q

For Appellant: Ms. Lalitha Krishnamurthy, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. T.James Singson, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(i)Section 143(2)(i)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(i)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AY: 2001-02 Sh. Keshab Chandra Jain vs. ACIT, Circle Noida C/o S.Ramanand Aiyar & Co. C.As Noida 708, Surya Kiran Bldg. 19, Kasturba Gandhi Marg New Delhi 110 001 PAN: ABUPJ 6333 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Lalitha Krishnamurthy, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. T.James Singson, Sr.D.R. ORDER PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the Assessee directed against the order dated 11.5.2011 of Ld.CIT(A), Ghaziabad pertaining…

Jayantilal Meghji Pokar, Mumbai vs. DCIT 22(1), Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7574/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2016AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti PatelFor Respondent: Shri B. Yadagiri
Section 14Section 2Section 54

…ssessee had entered into an agreement with builder for purchase of undivided share of land and construction, the date of allotment of undivided share in land instead of date of sale deed. Similarly, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of K. Ramakrishnan, 363 ITR 59, held that letter of allotment given by HUDA is relevant for the purpose of computing holding period and not date of registration of conveyance deed. The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Ms. Madhu Kaul, 363 ITR 54, held that immediately on allotment on which assessee paid for instalment, even though possession of flat was deliv…

S. Shankaranarayan, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 490/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Raoshri S.Shankaranarayan, No.708, 6Th B Cross, 3Rd Block, Koramangala, Bangalore-560034. … Appellant Pan: Aasps7994R Vs Income-Tax Officer (Tds) Ward 16(2), Bangalore. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Chavali NarayanFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, JCIT(DR)
Section 2(47)(v)Section 54F

…ort of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT vs. A. Suresh Rao (ITA No.417 2013)(Kar), ii) A.Suresh Rao vs. ITO (ITA No.761/Bang/2011)(Trib) iii) Vinod Kumar Jain vs. CIT (344 ITR 501)(Punjab & Haryana) iv) CIT vs. K.Ramakrishnan (363 ITR 59)(Delhi) Thus, the learned AR of the assessee has submitted that when the assessee has acquired the property in auction and the allotment letter was issued by the BDA in favour of the assessee, then the said Shri S.Shankaranarayan Page 5 of 10 property was held by the assessee on the date of allotment and therefore, on the date of sale, it was a L…