CIT v. Sambandam Udaykumar

345 ITR 389High Court2012#2303 most cited

What is CIT v. Sambandam Udaykumar authority for?

Assessees are entitled to capital gains exemption under Section 54 or 54F if sale proceeds are invested in a residential house. This benefit applies even if the construction or purchase transaction is not fully completed.

50

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sambandam Udaykumar · Section 54 exemption · Section 54F exemption · capital gains exemption · investment in residential house · incomplete construction · residential property purchase · transfer of capital asset · non-completion of transaction · capital gains benefit

Also reported as

251 CTR 371

Sections most often in play

Section 54Section 54FSection 45Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54B

Issues it is cited on

section 54(1)section 54(2)section 54f(1)section 54ftransfer of capital assetlong-term capital assetsection 54date of transfersection 45indexed cost of acquisitionsection 17long term capital gain

Judgments citing CIT v. Sambandam Udaykumar

Mr. Arunkumar Nathan, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1041/BANG/2017[2013 - 14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2017

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Biju, JCIT (DR) (ITAT)-3, Bengaluru
Section 54

…Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rukmaniamma 331 ITR 211. The assessee also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of DIT Vs. Khoobchand M Makhija 223 Taxman 189 as well as the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Sambandam Udaykumar 345 ITR 389. The CIT (Appeals) was not impressed with the contention of the assessee and also distinguished the decisions relied upon by the assessee because of the fact that in the present case these two flats are situated in different locations and therefore would not constitute single residential house property. Accordingly, the CIT (Appeals) upheld the a…

Income-Tax Officer, Bangalore vs. Shri. Ramakrishna M.J, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1326/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. A. K. Garodia & Shri. Laliet Kumari.T.A No.1326/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri. N. Sukumar, Addl. CIT
Section 45Section 54F

…is a beneficial provision and is in the statute book for promoting the construction of residential house and therefore this provision is to be applied liberally. For that purpose, the Ld. AR relied upon the following judgments : • CIT v. Sambandam Udaykumar [345 ITR 389-Kar] • CIT v. Smt. B. S. Shanthakumari [ITA.165/2014- Kar] • Commissioner of Customs v. Jayshree Insulators [(1998) 104 E.L.T.748] • State of Bihar v. S K. Raoy [AIR 1966 SC, dt.24.04.1966] 06. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Section 54F reads as under : 54F. Capital gain on transfer of certain. capital as…

The ACIT, Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Shri Bharatbhai Madhavlal Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1670/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Sept 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri A. N. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54FSection 54F(4)

…order dated 06.04.09. I am inclined to agree with the appellant that ratio of judgement in the above case is squarely applicable to the case of the appellant. Relying on the above cited judgement of hon'ble Kamataka High court in CIT vs. S. Uday Kumar (2012) 345 ITR 389 has held as follows: - "Section 45 of the Act makes it very clear that any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year shall, save or otherwise provided in sections 54, 54B, 54D, 54E, 54EA, 54EB, 54F, 54G and 54H is chargeable to income tax under the head 'capital gains' and shall be deemed to be in…

Mr.Aslam Zackria Sait, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed

ITA 453/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth G. S, CA and Shri. Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. G. Kamaladhar, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 54

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2012-13 Shri. Aslam Zackria Sait, Income Tax Officer, 6/4, Martello Boulevard, Ward-1(2)(3), 3rd Floor, Museum Road, 6th Floor, HMT Bhavan, Vs. Bengaluru-560001. Bellary Road, Bengaluru-560032. PAN : ABOPS 8691 J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Prashanth G. S, CA and Shri. Nitish Ranjan, CA Revenue by : Shri. G. Kamaladhar, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 27.03.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 17.05.2017 O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao, Ac…

ACIT, Kota vs. Smt. Zahida Bano, Kota

In the result, the Revenue appeal is dismissed

ITA 579/JPR/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 May 2017AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 579/JP/2013 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2005-06 cuke The ACIT, Smt. Zahida Bano, Vs. Circle- 1, 5-B-18, Vigyan Nagar, Kota. Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABSPB6777A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Ajay Malik (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ…

Shri. Mallappa Sharanappa Udnoor, Gulbarga vs. Income Tax Officer, Gulbarga

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 74/BANG/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Shreehari Kutsa, C.AFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT (D.R)
Section 139Section 139(4)Section 144Section 45Section 54Section 54B

…e disallowed only on the ground that the assessee did not deposit the capital gain in the capital gain account. The learned Authorised Representative has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Samandam Udaykumar 345 ITR 389 as well as the decision dt. 15.2.2016 in 5 the case of CIT Vs. C. Gopalaswamy in ITA No. 303/2016 and submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has held that if the investment is made within the due date then the benefit of Section 54 / 54F cannot be denied. 5. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative has relied upon the orders o…

Sangeeta Uberoi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5537/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillaisangeeta Oberai Acit A B-10A, Greater Kailas-I, Circle-23(1), New Delhi. Vs. Room No. 190, C. R. Building, Gir/Pan: Aagpu8313G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bedobani Choudhary, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sangeeta Oberai ACIT A B-10A, Greater Kailas-I, Circle-23(1), New Delhi. Vs. Room No. 190, C. R. Building, GIR/PAN: AAGPU8313G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Bedobani Choudhary, Sr.DR Date of hearing : 13-04-2017 Date of pronouncement : 25-04-2017 O R D E R PER BEENA A. PILLAI, J.M : 1. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 07.10.2010 passed by Ld. CIT (A)- XXIII,…

Basaribanu Mohd Rafiq Latiwala, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5420/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5420/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Smt. Basaribanu Mohd. Rafiq Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Latiwala, 12(3)(3), V. 701/702 Neelam, Aayakar Bhavan, Rizvi Complex, Mumbai. Carter Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai – 400 050. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abgpl0686G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak TralshawalaFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, DR
Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “H” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5420/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Smt. Basaribanu Mohd. Rafiq Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Latiwala, 12(3)(3), v. 701/702 Neelam, Aayakar Bhavan, Rizvi Complex, Mumbai. Carter Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai – 400 050. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : ABGPL0686G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Deepak Tralshawala, AR Revenue by : Shri B.S. Bist, DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of Hear…

ITO, Vijayapur vs. M/S Basavan Bagewadi Taluka Primary Teachers Co-Op Credit Society, Vijayapur

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

ITA 1191/BANG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Dec 2015AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Smt H.Vani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 263Section 54F

…eous and thus not prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 5. The decision of the ld.assessing authority in allowing the claim of sec.54F I in accordance with law laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sambandam Uday Kumar reported in 345 ITR 389(Kar.) and tht of the Madras High Court in CIT Vs Sardarmal Kothari reported in (2008) 302 ITR 286. The decision of Madras High Court has attained finality in view of the dismissal of the SLP filed by the department. ITA No.1190 (B)/2015 6.The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the case law relied upon by the assessee. 7. For these and other g…

ITO 13(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kumarpal P. Gandhi, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5798/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Shri Kumarpal P. Gandhi, Ward-13(2)(2), Flat No.3804, 38Th Floor, बनाम/ R. No.477, 4Th Floor, Shreepati Arcade, A-Wing, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, A.K.Marg, Nana Chowk, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400036 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aadpg0200D

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 54Section 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ए,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजे"", लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Rajendra, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Shri Kumarpal P. Gandhi, Ward-13(2)(2), Flat No.3804, 38th Floor, बनाम/ R. NO.477, 4th floor, Shreepati Arcade, A-Wing, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, A.K.Marg, Nana Chowk, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400036 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) PAN. No.AADPG0200D राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Mohammed Rizwan "नधा"रती क" ओर से /…