How many judgments cite CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh?

55 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh (309 ITR 233), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 48, Section 115JB, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 50C, Section 55A.

CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh

309 ITR 233High Court2009#2121 most cited

What is CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh authority for?

The full value of consideration for computing capital gains under Section 48 refers to the amount stated in the sale deed and cannot be substituted by the market value or a valuation by the DVO under Section 55A, unless there is evidence that the assessee actually received a consideration in excess of the stated amount.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh · Section 48 · full value of consideration · capital gains computation · stated sale consideration · DVO valuation · Section 55A · market value substitution · fair market value · Section 50C · Section 45

Also reported as

176 Taxmann 252

Sections most often in play

Section 48 Section 115JB Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 50C Section 55A Section 10(34)Section 115JB(2) Explanation 1

Issues it is cited on

section 45(1)section 271(l)full value of consideration section 48 valuation of shares section 156 dumb documents transfer of capital asset section 132(4a)section 50c section 50 section 45

Judgments citing CIT v. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh

VIJAY PAL SINGH,HARDOI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 56/LKW/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 147ASection 50CSection 50C(2)Section 55ASection 56(2)(vii)

…sideration received by the assessee, it was not possible to assess the capital gain by estimating what would be the fair market value of the land through valuer's report. 21. Decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Nilofer 1. Singh [2009] 309 ITR 233 was also brought to our notice; wherein, relying on the decision of George Henderson & Co. Ltd. (supra) and Gillanders Arbuthnot & Co. (supra), the Division Bench observed that expression "full value of consideration" used in Section 48 of the Act does not have reference to the market value but only to the consideration referred to in the sale de…

SAHIBZADA TIMBER AND PLY PRIVATE LIMITED ,MOHALI vs. DCIT, ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 699/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 699/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s Sahibzada Timber & Ply Private Limited B41-42, Phase-3, Indl. Aera, SAS Nagar Mohali, Punjab बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-2 Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAQCS2239G अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Mohit Dhiman, C.A राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR Shri Dharam Vir, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of He

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Dhiman, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 250(6)Section 50C

…sons that there is nothing on record to show that the assessee received a consideration for the sale of the said property in excess of that which was shown in the agreement to sell. That being the case the decision in the case of Smt. Nilofer I. Singh, [2009] 309 ITR 233 (Delhi) would bind the Revenue. The Tribunal, in our view erred in accepting the stand of the Revenue that actual sale consideration recorded in the agreement to sell would be substituted by the value arrived at by the DVO under section 55A of the Act. The question of law as framed is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue." T…

SMART INFORMATION WORLDWIDE INC,CHENNAI vs. ACIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 330/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.330/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Smart Information Worldwide Inc. Dcit बनाम/ 49 Sixth Main Road, International Taxation -2(2) Vs. Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai-600 028. Chennai-6. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-8497-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri V. Ravichandran (Ca)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V.Sreenivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06-08-2024

For Appellant: Shri V. Ravichandran (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 48Section 50CSection 50D

…n’ble Apex Court that since the revenue could not prove that the consideration was understated, the capital gains were to be computed on the basis of sale consideration. Following these decisions, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nilofer Singh (309 ITR 233) held that the expression full value of consideration used u/s 48 would not have any reference to the market value but only to consideration stated in the sale deeds. Similar are the decision of various other judicial authorities which are paced on record in the paper book. All these decisions support the view that full value of consideration cou…

SMART INFORMATION WORLDWIDE INC,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 329/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.329/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Smart Information Worldwide Inc. Dcit बनाम/ 49 Sixth Main Road, International Taxation -2(2) Vs. Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai-600 028. Chennai-6. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-8497-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri V. Ravichandran (Ca)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri V. Ravichandran (CA)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 48Section 50CSection 50D

…’ble Apex Court that since the revenue could not prove that the consideration was understated, the capital gains were to be computed on the basis of sale consideration. Following these decisions, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nilofer Singh (309 ITR 233) held that the expression full value of consideration used u/s 48 would not have any reference to the market value but only to consideration stated in the sale deeds. Similar are the decision of various other judicial authorities which are paced on record in the paper book. All these decisions support the view that full value of consideration cou…

SUBHASHCHAND CHANDAK (HUF),NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 85/NAG/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.M. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250Section 288ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.85/Nag./2021 (Assessment Year : 2006–07) Shri Subhashchand Chandak (HUF) Krishnakunj, 615, Maa Umiya Housing ……………. Appellant Society, Chikhli Layout Kalamna 440 035 PAN–AAIHS6865F v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–1, Nagpur Assessee by : Shri K.M. Gupta Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 11/07/2024 Date of Order – 16/07/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The instant appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the…

BASABDUTTA DUTTA. ,BANKURA vs. ITO,WARD- 3(1), KENDUADIHI, , KENDUADIHI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 868/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.868/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Basabdutta Dutta…………………..……………………....………....Appellant Kayasthapara, P.O+Dist – Bankura, Pin-722101. [Pan: Adtpd8748C] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Bankura….................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate & D.K. Sen, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sallong Yaden, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 13, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 11, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.07.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Ld. Cit(A)(Nfac) In Consideration Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Erred In Confirming Disallowance On Account Of Exemption Of Rs.1,65,52,344.00 Claimed U/S 54F On Return Of Income. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A)(Nfac) In Consideration Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Is Not Justified To Confirm Addition Of Rs.7,38,588.00 Made U/S 56(2)(Vii) 3. For That The Appellant Reserves His Right To Add To, To Alter, To Amend The Grounds & To Adduce Paper & Document At The Time Of Hearing.”

Section 250Section 54FSection 56(2)(VII)

….2630/Del/2015 pronounced on 30.04.2019 9. The Judgement of Hon'ble Madras High Court in MS. Moturi Lakshmi vs ITO vide [2020] 428 ITR 462 (Mad) pronounced on 17.08.2020 10. The Judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Smt. Nilofer I. Singh vide [2009] 309 ITR 233 ((Del) pronounced on 27.08.2008 6.4 We find that the issue is covered by the various decisions of courts of law. The decision of the Coordinate Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ‘Mr. Muthu Daniel Rajan vs ACIT’ dated 31.01.2023 (supra) is squarely applicable to the facts and issues in the present case. The Coordinate Chennai Bench of t…

SHIVI HOLDINGS PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-23(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2402/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshshivi Holdings Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, G-16, Marina Acade, Circle-23(1), Connaught Circus, New New Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaco2664H

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Asish Chandra Mohanty, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…in the case of CIT vs. George Henderson And co. ltd. (1967) 66 ITR 622 (SC) and CITvs. Gillanders Arbuthonot and Co., Ltd (1973) 87 Shivi Holdings Pvt. Ltd ITR 407 (SC) and also the decisions of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nilofer I. Singh-309 ITR 233 (Del) and Dev Kumar Jain vs. ITO & ANR (2009) 309 ITR 240 (Del)" 9. The contention of the assessee has been examined The shares that have been sold was listed and quoted at the stock exchange. The assessee's average cost price per share comes to Rs. 335.53 (as per the books of accounts). These shares have been transferred to the group companies…

MODI RUBBER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 17(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, Ground no.2 is partly allowed

ITA 6866/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia-

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr.DR

Section 10(34)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…vs. Attilli N Rao, 252 ITR 880 in the context of full price realised for the purpose of computation of capital gains. • CIT vs. N M A Mohammed Haniffa 247 ITR 66 (Mad). • CIT vs. George Henderson and Co. Ltd. 66 ITR 622 (SC). • CIT vs. Smt. Nilofer I Singh 309 ITR 233 (Del). • Smt D Zeenath vs. ITO 413 ITR 258 (Mad). 15.12 The decisions relied upon by the Revenue were rebutted by the assessee's counsel, that all those were cases relating to mortgage, and that the agreement between the assessee and the purchaser clearly showed that the retention money was neither received nor accrued in favour of the assessee…

SHRI LALIT KUMAR KALWAR,SARWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AJMER

ITA 894/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT) a

Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 894/JPR/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 Shri Lalit Kumar Kalwar cuke Income Tax Officer Vs. 1, M/s Jay Ambey Tyers Ward-2(3), Ajmer. Vijay Chowk, Ring Road, Sarwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACJPK 6242 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya (A…

SHRI LALIT KUMAR KALWAR,SARWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AJMER

ITA 379/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 48Section 50CSection 54FSection 54F(1)

…le. 8] It is submitted that the natural meaning of full value of consideration refers to consideration specified in the sale deed. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case CIT vs. Smt. Nilofer I. Singh (2009) 221 CTR (Del) 277: (2008) 14 DTR (Del) 108 (2009) 309 ITR 233 (Del) had held that full value of consideration refers to the consideration specified in the sale deed. For deciding the meaning of 8 Shri Lalit Kumar Kalwar, Sarwar. words 'full value of consideration', The Hon'ble Delhi High Court has referred to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court at p. 237 as under: "This controversy has already been settled…