CIT v. Soundararajan (150 ITR 80)

INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SURENDRA NATH GUBBALA, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 482/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

…(AP). viii) CIT Vs. Jagadish Sugar Mills (1974) Tax LR 526 (All.) ix) CIT Vs. MD Manohar Rao (1985) 155 ITR 696 (AP). x) Rohtak Textile Mills Ltd (1982) 138 ITR 195 (Del). xi) B.N. Pinto Vs. CIT (1974) 96 ITR 306 (Kar). xii) CIT Vs. C.V. Soundararajan (1984) 150 ITR 80 (Mad). xiii) CIT Vs. Abrar Ali (2001) 247 ITR 312 (Bom). xiv) Mala Kumar Vs. Asst. CIT (2020) Tax Pub (DT) 2107 (Delhi-Trib.) xv) CIT Vs. Eagle Theaters (2021) 205 Taxmann 449 (Del). xvi) Devendra Kumar Shroff, Kolkata Vs. ITO, Ward-7(2), Kolkata in I.T.A no: 158/Kol/2016 dated 26-02-2020 (ITATC Bench, Kolkata). xvii) CIT Vs.Smt. Thressiamma Abrah…

DCIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE - 2(1),, CHENNAI vs. SHRI JAYAPAL SANJAY, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 1737/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Jayapal Sanjay Income Tax, Non-Corporate 78/132, Dr. Radhakrishnan Circle-2(1), Chennai Salai, Mylapore, Room No. 320, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Chennai-600004. Wanaparthy Block, Aayakar (Pan: Aavps9647J) Bhavan, 121, M G Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Suhrith Parthasarathy, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 25.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-2, Chennai Vide Ita No. 161/2017-18/(A)-2 Dated 27.03.2019 Passed Against The Order Of Acit, Non-Corporate Circle-2, Chennai Dated 29.12.2017 U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2015-16. 2. Before Us Shri Suhrith Parthasarathy, Advocate Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Suhrith Parthasarathy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 48

…f Kaushalya Devi v. CIT (2018) 404 ITR 136 (Del) it is not discernible whether the property was free from encumbrance and that the tenants were related party or not. Similarly, in the case of CIT 19 Jayapal Sanjay AY 2015-16 v. C. V. Sundarajan & Anr. (1983) 150 ITR 80 (Mad), the payments were made for relinquishment of rights in the property sold. Also, in the case of CIT v. Ms. Piroja C. Patel (1999) 242 ITR 582 (Bom), it is a case of compensation paid towards compulsory acquisition of land. Thus, the judicial precedents relied on by the Ld. CIT(A) are distinguishable. 15. Considering the factual matrix, circ…

ROSHAN DAVID,CHENNAI vs. ITO INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 792/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 791/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 Shri Deep David, The Income Tax Officer, C/O R. Bupathy & Co., “Vibgyor” Vs. International Taxation 1(1), No. 139, 1St Floor, Kodambakkam Chennai 600 034. High Road, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Borpd3357R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 792/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 Shri Roshan David, The Income Tax Officer, C/O R. Bupathy & Co., “Vibgyor” International Taxation 1(1), Vs. No. 139, 1St Floor, Kodambakkam Chennai 600 034. High Road, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Borpd3355P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.09.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By Different Assessees Are Directed Against Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 16, Chennai, Dated 14.02.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. Since

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT

Section 46

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘बी” "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 791/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 Shri Deep David, The Income Tax Officer, C/o R. Bupathy & Co., “Vibgyor” Vs. International Taxation 1(1), No. 139, 1st Floor, Kodambakkam Chennai 600 034. High Road, Chennai 600 034. [PAN:BORPD3357R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 792/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment…

DEEP DAVID,CHENNAI vs. ITO INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 791/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 791/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 Shri Deep David, The Income Tax Officer, C/O R. Bupathy & Co., “Vibgyor” Vs. International Taxation 1(1), No. 139, 1St Floor, Kodambakkam Chennai 600 034. High Road, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Borpd3357R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 792/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 Shri Roshan David, The Income Tax Officer, C/O R. Bupathy & Co., “Vibgyor” International Taxation 1(1), Vs. No. 139, 1St Floor, Kodambakkam Chennai 600 034. High Road, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Borpd3355P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.09.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By Different Assessees Are Directed Against Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 16, Chennai, Dated 14.02.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. Since

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT

Section 46

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘बी” "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 791/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 Shri Deep David, The Income Tax Officer, C/o R. Bupathy & Co., “Vibgyor” Vs. International Taxation 1(1), No. 139, 1st Floor, Kodambakkam Chennai 600 034. High Road, Chennai 600 034. [PAN:BORPD3357R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 792/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment…

VIJAYA RAMAN, REP BY POA MR. T.R.BALASUBRAMANIAN,CHENNAI vs. DDIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 147/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.147/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Vijaya Raman, 14/2015, 1St Floor, ‘H' Block, The Deputy Director Of Income Tax 5Th Street, 12Th Main Road, V. (International Taxation) – 2(1), Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 040. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Asupr 6227 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Jayakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCIT

…g the building. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, both the authorities below are not justified in disallowing the claim of the assessee. The Ld.counsel placed his reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in CIT v. C.V. Soundararajan & Another (1984) 150 ITR 80 and submitted that when the assessee’s husband owned the building, the assessee has to necessarily pay compensation to her husband for relinquishing his right over the building. 4. On the contrary, Shri Shiva Srinivas, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that there was no agreement between the assessee and her husband at the time o…

ITO 15(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. ATUL PRAVINCHANDRA PAREKH, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1344/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Sanjay Aroraassessment Year: 2008-09 Ito-15(3)(1), Shri Atul Pravinchandra Room No.106, Parekh बनाम/ Matru Mandir, 1St Floor, 303, Shobha Apartment, 3Rd Vs. Tardeo Road, Floor, S.No. Road, Mumbai-400007 Tambe Nagar, Mulund (West), Mumbai-400080 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Ambpp5491R

Section 143(1)Section 69B

…ge of section 48(1)(a), it follows that all expenditure incidental to the transfer must be deducted in 7 Shri Atul Pravinchandra Prakash computing the amount of capital gains (CIT vs Rohtak Textiles Mills Ltd. )(1982) 138 ITR 195 (Del.), CIT vs Soundra Rajan (150 ITR 80). So far as, application of section 50C and consequent addition made u/s 69B of the Act is concerned, in the present appeal, the assessee is a buyer of the flat, therefore, section 50C of the Act, under the facts narrated hereinabove, is not applicable and even otherwise, section 69B has been added merely on surmises without bringing any adverse…

CIT v. Soundararajan

Sections most often in play