CIT v. Tribhuvandas G. Patel

115 ITR 95High Court1978#6821 most cited

What is CIT v. Tribhuvandas G. Patel authority for?

A partner retiring from a firm, where disputes are settled out of court through a deed of retirement, may attract capital gains tax under Section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, if the retirement constitutes a 'transfer' of their interest.

16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Tribhuvandas G. Patel · CIT v. Tribhuvandas G. Patel · Section 45 · capital gains tax · retirement from firm · transfer of interest · partnership dissolution · out of court settlement · deed of retirement · Bombay High Court

Judgments citing CIT v. Tribhuvandas G. Patel

Mohammed Mujeeb Sikander, Mangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle (1), Mangalore

ITA 1119/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)(a)Section 68Section 69B

…s to attract a charge under section 45 of the Act. 28.6 The Hon'ble Bombay High Court had an occasion to deal with identical case as that of the Assessee in the present case which was a case of situation (b) referred to earlier in Tribhuvandas G.Patel Vs. CIT 115 ITR 95(Bom). In the case of Tribhuvandas G. Patel (supra), the assessee was a partner in the firm of KEW. The assessee had served on the other two partners a notice of dissolution of the firm with effect from 31-12-1960, which was not accepted by the other ITA Nos.1117 to 1119/Bang/2022 Mohammed Mujeeb Sikander, Mangalore Page 84 of 131 partners. The a…

Mohammed Mujeeb Sikander, Mangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle (1), Mangalore

ITA 1117/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri T.M. Shivakumar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R
Section 1Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)(a)Section 68Section 69B

…s to attract a charge under section 45 of the Act. 28.6 The Hon'ble Bombay High Court had an occasion to deal with identical case as that of the Assessee in the present case which was a case of situation (b) referred to earlier in Tribhuvandas G.Patel Vs. CIT 115 ITR 95(Bom). In the case of Tribhuvandas G. Patel (supra), the assessee was a partner in the firm of KEW. The assessee had served on the other two partners a notice of dissolution of the firm with effect from 31-12-1960, which was not accepted by the other ITA Nos.1117 to 1119/Bang/2022 Mohammed Mujeeb Sikander, Mangalore Page 84 of 131 partners. The a…

Tree Hill Estates Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1395/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

…attract a charge under section 45 of the Act. 24. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court had an occasion to deal with identical case as that of the Assessee in the present case which was a case of situation (b) referred to earlier in Tribhuvandas G.Patel v. CIT [1978] 115 ITR 95 (Bom.) In the case of Tribhuvandas G. Patel (supra), the assessee was a partner in the firm of KEW. The assessee had served on the other two partners a notice of dissolution of the firm with effect from 31- 12-1960, which was not accepted by the other partners. The assessee, therefore, filed a suit for dissolution and accounts, but, ultimately, th…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Raunak Maru, Indore

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 27/IND/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

…ner. 6. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Riyaz A. Sheikh (2013) 84 CCH 0389(Bom) - Where the court has observed that in the matter of Prashant S. Joshi (2010) 324 ITP 154 the Honourable Bombay High Court itself has referred the decision of Tribuvandas G. Patel 115 ITR 95 which was rendered by it and reversed by the Apex Court. It has also been observed that moreover, the decision of Honourable Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT V/s. R. Lingamallu Rajkumar reported in [2001] 247 ITR 801 and held that amounts received on…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Rajul Bhargava, Indore

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 26/IND/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

…ner. 6. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Riyaz A. Sheikh (2013) 84 CCH 0389(Bom) - Where the court has observed that in the matter of Prashant S. Joshi (2010) 324 ITP 154 the Honourable Bombay High Court itself has referred the decision of Tribuvandas G. Patel 115 ITR 95 which was rendered by it and reversed by the Apex Court. It has also been observed that moreover, the decision of Honourable Bombay High Court in the case of Prashant S. Joshi placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT V/s. R. Lingamallu Rajkumar reported in [2001] 247 ITR 801 and held that amounts received on…

Synchem Chemicals (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2753/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2021AY 2010-11
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 45

…ance was also placed on the earlier decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tribhuvandas G. Patel vs. CIT reported in 236 ITR 515 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court over ruled the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the same case reported in 115 ITR 95(Bom). 11.1. Decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunil Siddharthbhai vs. CIT reported in 156 ITR 509(SC) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case was considering the question of taxability of transfer when a capital asset has been introduced as capital contribution by the partner into the partnership firm. The Court held that when th…

Anik Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 40, Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 7189/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7189/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) M/S. Anik Industries Ltd. Dcit-Central Circle -40 बनाम/ 610, Tulsiani Chambers Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm-2696-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5234/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) M/S. Anik Industries Ltd. Dcit-Central Circle -40 बनाम/ 610, Tulsiani Chambers Mumbai. Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm-2696-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 17/01/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 19/03/2020 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…ilities and prior charges is determined on taking accounts, there is no element of transfer of interest in the partnership assets by the retired partner to the continuing partners. 15. At this stage, it may be noted that in CIT v. Tribhuvandas G. Patel [1978] 115 ITR 95 (Bom.), which was decided by a Division Bench of this Court, under a deed of partnership, the assessee retired from the partnership firm and was inter alia paid an amount of Rs. 4,77,941 as his share in the remaining assets of the firm. The Division Bench of this Court had held that the transaction would have to be regarded as amounting to a trans…

Rahas Investment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2752/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Lupin Investments Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Private Limited (Successor To Income Tax, 10(1) Rahas Investments Private Aayakar Bhavan Limited M.K.Road, 159, Cst Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Kalina, Santacruz(E) Mumbai – 400 098 Pan/Gir No.Aaacr3202L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Lupin Investments Private Income Tax, 10(1) Limited (Successor To Rahas Aayakar Bhavan Investments Private Limited M.K.Road, 159, Cst Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Kalina, Santacruz(E) Mumbai – 400 098 Pan/Gir No.Aaacr3202L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Hemen Chandariya Revenue By Shri Padmapani Bora Date Of Hearing 08/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement 05/02/2020

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 45

…ance was also placed on the earlier decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tribhuvandas G. Patel vs. CIT reported in 236 ITR 515 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court over ruled the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the same case reported in 115 ITR 95(Bom). 11.1. Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunil Siddharthbhai vs. CIT reported in 156 ITR 509(SC) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said case was considering the question of taxability of transfer when a capital asset has been introduced as capital contribution by the partner into the partnership firm. The Court held that when t…

Mdlr Estates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8215/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…lities and prior charges is determined on taking accounts, there is no element of transfer of interest in the partnership assets by the retired partner to the continuing partners. At this stage, it may be noted that in CIT v. 15. Tribhuvandas G. Patel [1978] 115 ITR 95 (Bom.), which was decided by a Division Bench of this Court, under a deed of partnership, the assessee retired from the partnership firm and was inter alia paid an amount of Rs. 4,77,941 as his share in the remaining assets of the firm. The Division Bench of this Court had held that the transaction would have to be regarded as amounting to a trans…

Mdlr Builders P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8214/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 142Section 144Section 153ASection 264

…lities and prior charges is determined on taking accounts, there is no element of transfer of interest in the partnership assets by the retired partner to the continuing partners. At this stage, it may be noted that in CIT v. 15. Tribhuvandas G. Patel [1978] 115 ITR 95 (Bom.), which was decided by a Division Bench of this Court, under a deed of partnership, the assessee retired from the partnership firm and was inter alia paid an amount of Rs. 4,77,941 as his share in the remaining assets of the firm. The Division Bench of this Court had held that the transaction would have to be regarded as amounting to a trans…

Smt. Savitri Kadur, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed to the extent indicated above

ITA 1700/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 2(47)Section 45Section 54E

…s to attract a charge under section 45 of the Act. 24. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court had an occasion to deal with identical case as that of the Assessee in the present case which was a case of situation (b) referred to earlier in Tribhuvandas G.Patel Vs. CIT 115 ITR 95(Bom). In the case of Tribhuvandas G. Patel (supra), the assessee was a partner in the firm of KEW. The assessee had served on the other two partners a notice of dissolution of the firm with effect from 31-12-1960, which was not accepted by the other partners. The assessee, therefore, filed a suit for dissolution and accounts, but, ultimately, the…

Kripa Shanakar Singh, Mumbai vs. ITO Cir 21(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result this appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4146/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri. Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri. Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 10Section 10(14)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271FSection 273Section 55(2)

…ed the same argument that the assessee being MLA, the salary & allowance received were exempt u/s 10 and it was under bonafide belief that the receipt towards goodwill from the firm at the time of retirement was not taxable in view of the decisions in case of 115 ITR 95(Bom), 130 ITR 863(Bom) etc. Hence earlier no return was filed. The return was flied only when assessee learnt that the receipt of goodwill was taxable.” However, the Ld. CIT-A was not convinced he held that there has 5. already been the change of law u/s. 55(2), hence assessee’s claim of ignorance of law cannot be accepted. Ld. CIT-A proceeded to…

Kaushalya R Sampat, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3609/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Mrs. Kaushalya R. Sampat Income Tax Officer, Flat No.1A, Hill Top Society, 9(3)(2),Piramal Chambers, Pali Hill Road, Bandra(W) Vs. Lalbaug,Mumbai-400012 Mumbai-400050 Pan No.Aaqps06609F Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By .. Shri. K.Gopal, Ar Revenue By .. Shri. M.V. Rajguru, Dr Date Of Hearing .. 05-01-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 05-01-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 133ASection 144Section 148Section 68

…154 (Bom) has held as under:- “3. In the impugned order, the Tribunal does refer to the decision of this Court in the matter of N.A. Mody (supra) and states that it follows the decision of this Court in the matter of CIT V/s. Tribhuvandas G. Patel reported in 115 ITR 95 and the same has been reversed by the Apex Court in Tribhuvandas G. Patel V/s. CIT reported in 263 ITR 515. This Court in the matter of Prashant S. Joshi (supra) has also referred to the decision of Tribuvandas G. Patel (supra) rendered by this Court and its reversal by the Apex Court. Moreover, the decision of this Court in the case of Prashant S…

Ramesh Builders, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-Ramesh Builders(India) in ITA N0

ITA 1798/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1797/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Ramesh Builders (India), Income Tax बनाम/ 9, Dhiraj Chambers, Officer,12(1)(2),Aayakar V. 9, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Bhavan,M.K. Road, Fort,Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafr4655E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Dr. Mukesh Jain,DR
Section 143(3)Section 45(4)

…ered in the matter of Prashant S. Johsi (supra). 3. In the impugned order, the Tribunal does refer to the this Court in the matter of N.A. Modi (supra) and states that it follows the decision of this Court in the matter of CIT v. Tribhuvandas G. Patel [1978] 115 ITR 95 (Bom.) and the same has been reversed by the Apex Court in Tribhuvandas G. Patel v. CIT [1999] ITA 1797/Mum/2012 & 31 ITA 1798/Mum/2012 236 ITR 515. This Court in the matter of Prashant S. Joshi (supra) has also referred to the decision of Tribuvandas G. Patel (supra) rendered by this Court and its reversal by the Apex Court. Moreover, the dec…

Ramesh Builders (India), Mumbai vs. ITO 12(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee-Ramesh Builders(India) in ITA N0

ITA 1797/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1797/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Ramesh Builders (India), Income Tax बनाम/ 9, Dhiraj Chambers, Officer,12(1)(2),Aayakar V. 9, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Bhavan,M.K. Road, Fort,Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaafr4655E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Dr. Mukesh Jain,DR
Section 143(3)Section 45(4)

…ered in the matter of Prashant S. Johsi (supra). 3. In the impugned order, the Tribunal does refer to the this Court in the matter of N.A. Modi (supra) and states that it follows the decision of this Court in the matter of CIT v. Tribhuvandas G. Patel [1978] 115 ITR 95 (Bom.) and the same has been reversed by the Apex Court in Tribhuvandas G. Patel v. CIT [1999] ITA 1797/Mum/2012 & 31 ITA 1798/Mum/2012 236 ITR 515. This Court in the matter of Prashant S. Joshi (supra) has also referred to the decision of Tribuvandas G. Patel (supra) rendered by this Court and its reversal by the Apex Court. Moreover, the dec…

Anant B. Tawade, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 6362/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6362/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Shri Anand B. Tawade, Ito – 17(3)(1), बनाम/ 106, Roop Rayon Mill Piramal Chambers, V. Compound, Lalbaug, Near Datt Mandir, Mumbai. Jijamata Nagar, Kalachowki, Mumbai – 400 033. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Acdpt 9937A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare (Sr.DR)
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)

….e.f. 1.4.1988. Thus the A.O. observed that there was a transfer within the meaning of ITA 6362/Mum/2012 6 section 2(47) of the Act giving rise to capital gain exigible to tax. The AO relied upon following judgments :- 1. CIT v. Tribhuvandas G Patel (1978) 115 ITR 95(Bom.) 2. CIT v. H R Aslot (1978) 115 ITR 255(Bom.) 3. N A Mody v. CIT (1986) 162 ITR 420(Bom.) 4. Shevantibhai C. Mehta v. ITO, Pune-Tibunal. Thus, the goodwill amount of Rs. 75,53,858/- received by the assessee is treated as long term capital gain and charged to tax by the A.O., vide assessment order dated 29-12-2011 passed by the AO u/s 147 r.…

CIT v. Tribhuvandas G. Patel (115 ITR 95) — Cited in 16 Judgments | BharatTax