What is CIT v. V A Trivedi authority for?

The character of a transaction as an adventure in the nature of trade, or not, depends on the totality of circumstances, and no single test is sufficient. Specifically, for land, the court will consider its use for agricultural purposes prior to transfer and the intended future use by the purchaser.

How many judgments cite CIT v. V A Trivedi?

37 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. V A Trivedi (172 ITR 95), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. V A Trivedi come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 115BBE, Section 133(6), Section 142(1), Section 143(1), Section 143(2).

CIT v. V A Trivedi (172 ITR 95)

SH. DEVENDRA DUTT PANT,HARIDWAR vs. DCIT , UTTARKAHAND

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 149/DDN/2025[2106-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Jan 2026AY 2106-2017

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 54BSection 54E

…ld be present or absent in any case and that in each case one or more of those factors may make appearance and that the ultimate decision will have to be reached on a balanced consideration of the totality of circumstances." (13) In CIT v. V.A. Trivedi [1988] 172 ITR 95 a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, of which one of us (S.P. Bharucha, J.) was a member, considered this question again. In this case the assessee had purchased the land of an extent of seven acres in February 1966. The land was covered by the Nagpur Improvement Trust Scheme. In August 1966 he obtained permission to convert the 9 Devendra D…

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BIKANER vs. MUKESH SHAH, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 399/JODH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24

…Courts in the cases Khan Bahadm Ahmed Alladin& Sons v. CIT (1968) 68 ITR 573 (SC), P. Mohd. Meera Khan v. CIT (1969) 73 ITR 735 (SC). Premji Bhimji. v. CIT (1971) 81 ITR 179 (Cal), CIT v. H. Holck Larsen (1986) 160 1TR 67 (SC) and CIT v. VA.Trivedi (1988) 172 ITR 95 (Bom) have held that it was not possible to evolve any single test or formula which can be applied in determining whether a transaction is adventure in the nature of trade or not. The answer to question must necessarily depend in each case as the total impression and effect of all the relevant factors and circumstances which I.T.A. No. 399/Jodh/…

MR DNYANESHWAR BABURAO KATHE,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 432/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.432/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mr. Dnyaneshwar Baburao Vs. Ito, Ward-1(3), Pune. Kathe, Janori Dhawa, 10Th Mail Road, Dindori, Nashik- 422206. Pan : Bbppk3199D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Krishna V. Gujarathi Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.01.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) On The Facts & In The Circumstance Of The Case & In Law The Honorable Cit(A) Has Erred & Is Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.31,58,740/- By Treating The Cash Deposits Made By The Assessee In The Saving Bank Account Of Dena Bank As Unexplained Income Without Appreciating The Fact That The Said Cash Deposited In The Bank Was Out Of Agriculture Sale Proceeds. The Appellant Prays That The Addition May Please Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Shri Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 148Section 3Section 50CSection 54F

…laws in support of their contentions :- (i) Abhijit Subhas Gaikwad vs. DCIT, 60 taxmann.com 259 (Pune – Trib.). (ii) Gopal C. Sharma vs. CIT, 209 ITR 946 (Bombay). 10 (iii) Smt. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim vs. CIT, 204 ITR 631 (SC). (iv) CIT vs. V.A. Trivedi, 172 ITR 95 (Bombay). (v) CIT vs. Siddharth J. Desai, 139 ITR 628 (Gujarat). 10. We have heard Ld. Counsel from both the sides and perused the material available on record including additional evidences furnished by the assessee and case laws relied on by both the parties. We find that the assessee has challenged addition of Rs.31,58,540/- and determination o…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(20, CHENNAI vs. RAMA NARAYANAN (LATE), L/H SHRINARAYANAN RAMASWAMY, CHENNAI

ITA 3080/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3080/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner – V. Mr.Rama Narayanan (Late) Of Income Tax, L/H Mr.Narayanan- Central Circle-2(2), Ramasamy, Chennai. No.14/19, Saraswathi Street, Mahalingapuram, Chennai-600 034. [Pan: Achpr 5912 K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 132Section 153CSection 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)

…relevant date and further as to whether on the date of the transfer the land in question was intended to be put to use by the purchaser for agricultural purposes for a reasonable span of time in future. 17. The Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. V.A.Trivedi (1988) 172 ITR 95 (SC) observed that to ascertain the true character and the nature of the land, it must be seen whether the land had been put to use for agricultural purposes for a reasonable span of time prior to the relevant date and further as to whether on the date the transfer the land in question was intended to be put to use by the purchaser for agricultura…

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 204/NAG/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit Vs. Shri Vinod Balbhadra Goenka Circle-4 247, Nandanvan Layout Nagpur Nagpur Pan No.:Aanpg 6841 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal By Revenue Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur Dated 30/03/2017 In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 4/198/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM Assessment Year: 2014-15 The ACIT Vs. Shri Vinod Balbhadra Goenka Circle-4 247, Nandanvan Layout Nagpur Nagpur PAN No.:AANPG 6841 N Appellant Respondent Revenue by :Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR) Assessee by: Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Date of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. This is an appeal by Revenue against order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur dated 30/03/2017 in Appeal No.CIT(A)- 4/198/16-17 for the assessment year 2014-15.…

SMT. CHANDRIKA KANTILAL PATEL,,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 6(3) NEW WARD 4(5), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 13/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri V.V. SaranjameFor Respondent: Smt. Agnes P. Thomas

Section 148Section 250

…a process of evaluation. The inference has to be drown on a cumulative consideration of all the relevant facts.” Several judgments of this court and the High Courts were referred to including a judgment of the Bombay High Court in C/T v. V. A. Trivedi [1988] 172 ITR 95. On a consideration of the factors for and against, the Bombay High Court observed in V.A, Trrivedi’s case [1988J 172 ITR 95 that for ascertaining the true character and the nature of the land, it must be seen whether it has been put to use for agricultural purposes for a reasonable span of time prior to the date of sa/e and further whether on the…

SHAILESHBHAI KALABHAI CHAUDHARY,GANDHINAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-4, GANDHINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 581/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shaurya S. Shukla, Sr.D.R

…n nature. As such, the actual and the intended use of the agricultural land has to be seen for the purpose of exemption under section 2(14) of the Act. 9.5 Similarly, the criteria laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT v. V.A Trivedi [1988] 172 ITR 95/38 Taxman 102 is to find out true character and nature of the land is to ascertain whether the land has been used for the reasonable span of time for the agricultural operations and further it was intended use such land for agricultural operations for the reasonable span of time in the future. A.Y. 2014-15 7 9.6 From the above it can be concluded…

KANTABEN GOVABHAI PATEL,GANDHINAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-2, GANDHINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2020/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shaurya S. Shukla, Sr.D.R

…n nature. As such, the actual and the intended use of the agricultural land has to be seen for the purpose of exemption under section 2(14) of the Act. 9.5 Similarly, the criteria laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT v. V.A Trivedi [1988] 172 ITR 95/38 Taxman 102 is to find out true character and nature of the land is to ascertain whether the land has been used for the reasonable span of time for the agricultural operations and further it was intended use such land for agricultural operations for the reasonable span of time in the future. A.Y. 2014-15 7 9.6 From the above it can be concluded…

SOMABHAI MOTIBHAI PATEL,GANDHINAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-4, GANDHINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2019/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shaurya S. Shukla, Sr.D.R

…n nature. As such, the actual and the intended use of the agricultural land has to be seen for the purpose of exemption under section 2(14) of the Act. 9.5 Similarly, the criteria laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT v. V.A Trivedi [1988] 172 ITR 95/38 Taxman 102 is to find out true character and nature of the land is to ascertain whether the land has been used for the reasonable span of time for the agricultural operations and further it was intended use such land for agricultural operations for the reasonable span of time in the future. A.Y. 2014-15 7 9.6 From the above it can be concluded…

BABUBHAI MOTIBHAI CHAUDHARY,GANDHINAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2018/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shaurya S. Shukla, Sr.D.R

…n nature. As such, the actual and the intended use of the agricultural land has to be seen for the purpose of exemption under section 2(14) of the Act. 9.5 Similarly, the criteria laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT v. V.A Trivedi [1988] 172 ITR 95/38 Taxman 102 is to find out true character and nature of the land is to ascertain whether the land has been used for the reasonable span of time for the agricultural operations and further it was intended use such land for agricultural operations for the reasonable span of time in the future. A.Y. 2014-15 7 9.6 From the above it can be concluded…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE vs. M/S. RENAISSANCE CULTIVATION LLP,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1416/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1416/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Central Circle-2(1), Vs. M/S Renaissance Pune. Cultivation Llp, Pastakiya House, A/P Kamshet Maval, Pune- 410405 Pan : Aaofr7634K Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri J. P. Chadraker Assessee By Shri Neelesh Khandelwal : Date Of Hearing : 16.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Pune [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 21.03.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Revenue Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee Without Appreciating The Entire Facts Of The Case.

For Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

Section 143(3)

…so placing reliance on the following decisions held that it is business transactions and, accordingly, assessed to tax as business income of Rs.86,41,95,095/- :- (i) Smt. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim & Others vs. CIT, 204 ITR 631 (SC). (ii) CIT vs. V.A. Trivedi, 172 ITR 95 (Bom.). (iii) Gopal C. Sharma vs. CIT, 209 ITR 946 (Bom.). 7 Abhijit Gaikwad, Shubhash Gaikwad and Ajit Gaikwad vs. DCIT, Central 2(1), Pune, ITA No.699, 700 & 701/PN/2013 (ITAT Pune). (v) Jitendra Sonigara vs. ACIT, Cir-9, Pune, ITA No.849/PN/2012 (ITAT Pune). (vi) Hanmantram Murlidhar & Company Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Panwel, ITA No.515/PN/2012, (ITAT…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOCHI vs. M/S.COCHIN MALABAR ESTATES & INDUSTRIES LTD.

ITA/179/2014HC Kerala28 Oct 2021

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

Section 143(2)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 260A

…n3. 5.1 Summarised, the learned counsel's arguments are that the starting point relevant for determining whether the schedule property was sold as agricultural land or non- agricultural land was the date of execution of MoA dated 2 (1988) 172 ITR 95 (Bom) 3 (2019) 416 ITR 311 (Ker) I.T.A. No.179/2014 -12- 01.12.1995. MoA enables the assessee to cut and carry away standing rubber trees in schedule property. The assessee by cutting and carrying away the standing rubber trees shall not be allowed to contend that the schedule property which had rubber plantation could be continued/treated…