CIT v. Smt. K.C. Agnes

262 ITR 354High Court2003#4335 most cited

What is CIT v. Smt. K.C. Agnes authority for?

A registered sale deed cannot be disregarded for income tax purposes, even if an agreement or other document shows a higher purchase price. Addition under Section 69B cannot be made based solely on such discrepancies when a registered sale deed is available.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Smt. K.C. Agnes · registered sale deed · section 69B · addition · purchase price · agreement to sell · discrepancies · income tax act

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 292CSection 115BBESection 143(3)Section 153ASection 69BSection 139Section 68

Issues it is cited on

transferee companysection 131(1a)section 38section 69bsection 292csection 91on-moneysurvey under section 133asection 65bsection 65section 132asection 132(4a)

Judgments citing CIT v. Smt. K.C. Agnes

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, THIRD FLOOR vs. RAMA SHANKAR KHEMKA, GANESH BAZAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1005/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…EPARTMENT, GOVT. OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI, THAT IN VIEW OF 35 Khemka Group REGISTRED SALE DEED NO ADDITIONCAN BE MADE U/S 69 OF THE ACT: It is will settled law that sale deed cannot be disregarded as has been held in the following judgments: 1) 262 ITR 354 (Ker) CIT vs. K.C.Agnes and Ors (extracted at page 316 of Paper Book) ii) 323 ITR 588 (P&H) Paramjit Singh vs. ITO (extracted at page 316 of Paper Book) iii) 316 ITR 46 (Del) CIT vs. Shankutla Devi (extracted at page 317 of Paper Book) iv) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. Asstt. CIT vi) 250 ITR 484 (P&H) CIT vs. Satinder Kumar vii) 323 I…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, THIRD FLOOR vs. RAJESH RANI KHEMKA , GANESH BAZAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1004/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…EPARTMENT, GOVT. OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI, THAT IN VIEW OF 35 Khemka Group REGISTRED SALE DEED NO ADDITIONCAN BE MADE U/S 69 OF THE ACT: It is will settled law that sale deed cannot be disregarded as has been held in the following judgments: 1) 262 ITR 354 (Ker) CIT vs. K.C.Agnes and Ors (extracted at page 316 of Paper Book) ii) 323 ITR 588 (P&H) Paramjit Singh vs. ITO (extracted at page 316 of Paper Book) iii) 316 ITR 46 (Del) CIT vs. Shankutla Devi (extracted at page 317 of Paper Book) iv) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. Asstt. CIT vi) 250 ITR 484 (P&H) CIT vs. Satinder Kumar vii) 323 I…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. PAYAL KHEMKA , K

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1000/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

…EPARTMENT, GOVT. OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI, THAT IN VIEW OF 35 Khemka Group REGISTRED SALE DEED NO ADDITIONCAN BE MADE U/S 69 OF THE ACT: It is will settled law that sale deed cannot be disregarded as has been held in the following judgments: 1) 262 ITR 354 (Ker) CIT vs. K.C.Agnes and Ors (extracted at page 316 of Paper Book) ii) 323 ITR 588 (P&H) Paramjit Singh vs. ITO (extracted at page 316 of Paper Book) iii) 316 ITR 46 (Del) CIT vs. Shankutla Devi (extracted at page 317 of Paper Book) iv) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. Asstt. CIT vi) 250 ITR 484 (P&H) CIT vs. Satinder Kumar vii) 323 I…

ANEES BEGUM,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 971/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.971/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Smt. Anees Begum Vs. Acit Hyderabad Central Circle 2(3) Pan:Bbhb8220J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Spg Mudaliar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/02/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

…ITA No 971 of 2024 Anees Begum आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.971/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Smt. Anees Begum Vs. ACIT Hyderabad Central Circle 2(3) PAN:BBHB8220J Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CA राज" व "ारा/Revenue by:: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 24/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/02/2025 आदेश/ORDER Per Vijay Pal Ra…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD vs. SV MULTI LOGITECH PRIVATE LIMITED , SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 82/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.81/Hyd/2021 & 82/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. S.V.Multi Logitech Income Tax Private Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aascs7131D] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 18/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 04.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2015-16 & 2016-17. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Common Order. S.V.Multi Logitech Private Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant Member and Shri K.Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.81/Hyd/2021 & 82/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner of Vs. S.V.Multi Logitech Income Tax Private Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [PAN :AASCS7131D] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,AR रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of Hearing: 25/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of 1…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD vs. SV MULTI LOGITECH PRIVATE LIMITED , SECUNDERBAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 81/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.81/Hyd/2021 & 82/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. S.V.Multi Logitech Income Tax Private Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aascs7131D] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 18/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 04.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2015-16 & 2016-17. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Common Order. S.V.Multi Logitech Private Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant Member and Shri K.Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.81/Hyd/2021 & 82/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner of Vs. S.V.Multi Logitech Income Tax Private Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [PAN :AASCS7131D] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,AR रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of Hearing: 25/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of 1…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-03, DELHI, DELHI vs. BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PVT. LTD, DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2753/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…e Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 has confirmed the above Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court by dismissing the Departmental Appeal. 37. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) held as under :- “After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the agr…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-03, DELHI, DELHI vs. BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PVT. LTD,, DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2752/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…e Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 has confirmed the above Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court by dismissing the Departmental Appeal. 37. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) held as under :- “After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the agr…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-03, DELHI, DELHI vs. BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PVT. LTD, DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2751/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…e Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 has confirmed the above Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court by dismissing the Departmental Appeal. 37. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) held as under :- “After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the agr…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COPANY PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2473/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…e Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 has confirmed the above Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court by dismissing the Departmental Appeal. 37. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) held as under :- “After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the agr…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2472/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…e Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 has confirmed the above Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court by dismissing the Departmental Appeal. 37. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) held as under :- “After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the agr…

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2324/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…e Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 has confirmed the above Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court by dismissing the Departmental Appeal. 37. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) held as under :- “After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the agr…

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -3, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2323/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…e Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 has confirmed the above Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court by dismissing the Departmental Appeal. 37. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) held as under :- “After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the agr…

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2322/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…e Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 has confirmed the above Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court by dismissing the Departmental Appeal. 37. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) held as under :- “After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the agr…

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2321/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…e Court in the case of CIT vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram reported in 294 ITR 49 has confirmed the above Judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court by dismissing the Departmental Appeal. 37. The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) held as under :- “After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the agr…

ACIT, CIRCLE CC 15, NEW DELHI vs. ALKA MENDIRATTA , DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1864/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 69

…nt has submitted the valuation report of the independent valuer and also the comparative sale instances and the AO has not pointed out any discrepancy in these report/instances. (vi) The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) had held as under: "After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the…

ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI vs. YASH PAL MENDIRATTA, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1863/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 69

…nt has submitted the valuation report of the independent valuer and also the comparative sale instances and the AO has not pointed out any discrepancy in these report/instances. (vi) The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes (2003) 262 ITR 354 (Kerala) had held as under: "After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against the assessee, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs.8,000 per cent, had been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The sale deed showed that the price was Rs.8,000 per cent while the…

C VAMSI KRISHNA ,HYDERABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 528/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 C.Vamsi Krishna V Dcit,Cc-2 Flat No.-401 S. Aaykar Bhawan Rohiwal Windsor Basheerbagh Apartment, Hill Fort Road Hyderabad-500 04 Saifabad Hyderabad-500 004

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish,CIT-DR
Section 153CSection 1S

…at lesser price. He submitted that the registered document shows a particular price which should be considered as correct in absence of any contrary material. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. K.C.Agnes reported in 262 ITR 354, he 13 ITA 528/Hyd/2020 submitted that it is not necessary that the price stated in the agreement should be taken as against the amount mentioned in the sale deed. He further submitted that there is no evidence before the AO that assessee has received any extra money over and above what is mentioned in the sale deed. For the above proposition he…

VATIKA LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 8, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 887/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 69

…re was something wrong with some other transactions entered into, that would not give rise to an adverse inference in so far as the subject MOUs are concerned.” 21. Similar view was taken by the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Smt. K.C. Agnes & Ors. 262 ITR 354 where in it has been held as under: “5. After considering the evidence and on the basis of the assessment order passed against Pasha, the case of the assessee that the property was purchased at the rate of Rs. 8,000 per cent has been accepted. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the appeals. The sale deed will show that the price was for Rs. 8,000 per c…

FLYTECH AVIATION LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1712/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 Flytech Aviation Limited, Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Secunderabad. Income Tax, Circle 1(3), Pan : Aaacf3053D. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Kumar Pal Tated, Ca Revenue By: Shri Solge Jost Kottaram Date Of Hearing: 11.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.09.2022

For Appellant: Shri Kumar Pal Tated, CAFor Respondent: Shri Solge Jost Kottaram
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 69B

…upon the following decisions to state that the valuation done by the Customs Authorities cannot be doubted by the Assessing Officer. 1. K.P. Verghese Vs. ITO - 131 ITR 597 (SC), 2. CIT Vs. P.V. Kalyanasundaram – 294 ITR 49 (SC). 3. CIT Vs. Smt. K.C. Agnes – 262 ITR 354 (Kerala High Court) 4. Asma Estates and Investments Pvt Ltd. Vs. DCIT – ITA 782/Hyd/2020. 5. The Lok Prakashan Ltd. Vs. JCIT – ITA 1394/Ahd/2009. 6. DCIT Vs. Value Labs LLP – ITA 305/Hyd/2015. 12 7. ITO Vs. Happy Homes and Hotels Private Limited – ITA 1545/Kol/2011. 14. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on rec…

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Smt. K.C. Agnes (262 ITR 354) — Cited in 27 Judgments | BharatTax