How many judgments cite CIT v. Sambhaji Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd.?

23 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Sambhaji Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd. (370 ITR 325), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Sambhaji Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 142(1), Section 143(2), Section 234B, Section 234C, Section 55, Section 147.

CIT v. Sambhaji Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd.

370 ITR 325High Court2015#5130 most cited

What is CIT v. Sambhaji Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd. authority for?

Transferable Development Rights (TDR), generated by a change in zoning laws and transferred, do not result in capital gains as they lack an ascertainable cost of acquisition. Gains from the transfer of such rights are not taxable.

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. Sambhaji Nagar Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. · section 55 · section 55(2) · long term capital gain · Transferable Development Rights · TDR · cost of acquisition · capital gains tax

Also reported as

54 Taxmann.com 77

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 234B Section 234C Section 55 Section 147 Section 148 Section 148A

Issues it is cited on

section 55(2)section 55 long term capital gain reassessment proceedings income from other sources transfer section 148 person india interest total income section 14

Judgments citing CIT v. Sambhaji Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd.

ITO WD 21(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bharat Raojibhai Patel, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5038/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2007-08 Ito Ward 21(1)(1), Shri Bharat Raojibhai Patel Mumbai 34, Ram Niwas Valabhnagar Vs. Society, N S Road No.3, Jvpd, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai- 400 056

For Appellant: Smt Bharati SinghFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay R Parikh

Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 54

…assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bertha T Almeida vs. ITO [2015] 53 taxmann.com 522 (Bom). He also relied on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sambhaji Nagar Co-op Hsg. Society Ltd. [2015] 370 ITR 325 (Bom) and also on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dinesh D Ranka [2016] 380 ITR 440 (Kar). In view of these decisions, the learned counsel for the assessee stated that transfer of property under development agreement is a capital asset and this is supported by the propositions cited supra. 9. In respect to…

Arjun D. Chhabria, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(3), Mumbai

ITA 3242/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Goel

Section 143Section 254(1)Section 54F

…ssessed at Bangalore and the claim of TDR was accepted by the Department, that income arising out of sale of TDR was not taxable. He referred to the cases of land these co- operative housing society (55SOT103), Shambhji Nagar co-operative housing society Ltd.(370 ITR 325), Madhuban CHS (ITA/3257/ MUM/ 2011-AY .2006-07, dated 26/02/2014). The Departmental Representative (DR)stated that matter could be decided on merits. 5.We have heard the rival submissions and parents the material before us.We find that the AO and the FAA had held that assessee was not the owner of the roads for which TDR agreement was executed.…

Akhand Aabhar Co. Op. Hsg. Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 19(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2494/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G S Pannu, Am & Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2002 - 03 Akhand Aabhar Co-Op Hsg. Soc. Asst Cit 19(3), Ltd., Mumbai Vs Plot No.332, Tps Iii, 21St Road, Near Hotel Commando, Bandra (W) Mumbai- 400 050 Pan Aaaaa6279N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Vipul Joshi & S M BandiFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh

Section 133ASection 147Section 2(14)Section 45Section 48

…n’ble Supreme Court. So far as the question that the cost of additional TDR is determinable or not, the issue is now squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of “CIT vs. Shambaji Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.” 370 ITR 325, wherein Hon’ble Bombay High Court while relying upon the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Shetty (supra) has held that in the case of the society ,the receipt in lieu of transfer of TDR rights cannot be subjected to capital Gains Tax. 6. The Hon’ble High Court agreed with the vie…