CIT v. S.P. Balasubramaniam

250 ITR 127High Court#23976 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Judgments citing CIT v. S.P. Balasubramaniam

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Mahesh Kumar, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 173/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 173/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Vs Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Circle-21(1), C-13/170, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpk4117B Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 17.10.2011 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, CIT DR

Section 143(1)Section 271A

…king the benefit of provisions of Section 111A of the Act. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " G. Venkataswami Naidu and Co. Vs CIT (1959) 35 ITR 594 (SC) " Indramani Bai (Smt.) Vs Addl. CIT 200 ITR 594 (SC) " CIT Vs V. S. P. Balasubramaniam 250 ITR 127 (Mad.) " Immortal Financial Services P. Ltd. Vs DCIT in ITA No. 4094/Mum/2010 order dated 20.10.2010 " Smt. Rekha Khandelwal Vs ACIT in ITA No. 785/Mum/2009 order dated 17.03.2010 6 Mahesh Kumar " DCIT-5(2) Vs M/s Pentagon Builders Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 6045/Mum/2009 order dated 22.12.2010 " Sadhana Nabera Vs ACIT in ITA No. 2586/Mum/2009 order d…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Arvind Rajkishore Sharma, Mumbai

In the result, assessment framed on the basis of such invalid and in appropriate reasons is also quashed”

ITA 7137/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…अर"वंद राज"कशोर शमा" 1 Arvind Rajkishore Sharma आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI "ी राज", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी अिमत शु"ला, "याियक सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. : 7137/Mum/2012 (Assessment year: 2006-07) अर"वंद राज"कशोर शमा" DCIT-7(3), Vs R. No. 615, 6th Floor, Arvind Rajkishore Sharma, Aayakar Bhavan, 11, Ocean View Annexe, Mumbai -400 020 100, Bhulabha Desai Road, Mumbai -400 026 "थयी लेखा सं.:PAN: AAGPS 5691 F अपीलाथ" (Appellant) ""यथ" (Respondent) Appellant by "ी राज" कुमार S…

DCIT, Circle - 11, Kolkata vs. M/S. Eveready Industries India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 94/KOL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: MD.Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 41(1)Section 43B

…e AO, the Assessee by handing over possession to a developer was to get constructed area instead of open land. The Assessee wanted to make gain on sale of land and therefore had indulged in an adventure in the nature of trade. (vi) CIT Vs. S.P.Balasubramaniam 250 ITR 127 (Mad.) wherein it was held that even a single adventure in the nature of trade was sufficient to constitute trade or business and it was not necessary that there should be a series of transactions before the activities are characterized as a trade or business. The AO finally concluded that in view of the aforesaid discussion, it is held that the…