How many judgments cite DCIT v. Dr. Chalasani Mallikarjuna Rao?

10 judgments on BharatTax cite DCIT v. Dr. Chalasani Mallikarjuna Rao (75 Taxmann.com 270), spanning 2018 to 2023.

DCIT v. Dr. Chalasani Mallikarjuna Rao

75 Taxmann.com 270Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2016#10904 most cited

What is DCIT v. Dr. Chalasani Mallikarjuna Rao authority for?

When computing exemption under Section 54F, the Assessing Officer cannot adopt a deemed consideration based on Section 50C if the assessee has already invested the sale proceeds in property.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2023.

Also referred to as

DCIT v. Dr. Chalasani Mallikarjuna Rao · Section 54F · Section 50C · Capital Gains Exemption · deemed consideration · sale proceeds · investment in property · long term capital gain · property purchase · CGAS A/c · net consideration

Also reported as

161 ITD 721

Judgments citing DCIT v. Dr. Chalasani Mallikarjuna Rao

Senthil Kumar (HUF), Tuticorin Chennai vs. ITO, Ward 4, Tuticorin Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 653/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 653/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Senthil Kumar (Huf) Ito, 34B/4, Briyant Nagar, V. Ward-4, 4Th Street Middle, Tuticorin. Bryant Nagar, Tuticorin – 628 008 . [Pan: Abahs-1591-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2023

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 50CSection 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए (एस एम सी)’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A(SMC)’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी मंजुनाथ. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 653/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Senthil Kumar (HUF) ITO, 34B/4, Briyant Nagar, v. Ward-4, 4th Street Middle, Tuticorin. Bryant Nagar, Tuticorin – 628 008 . [PAN: ABAHS-1591-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, CA ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03.08.2023 घोष…

JCIT (OSD), Circle-17(1), Mumbai vs. Nafisa Asgar Mun, Mumbai

ITA 443/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. A.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 54

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner of Ms. Nafisa Asgar Mun, Income Tax-17(1), 1204, Sagar Classic Clare 1st Floor, Room No.117, Road, Kautilya Bhavan, Vs. Byculla-400 008 G-Block, Bandra Kurla PAN: AAFPM9597D Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Himanshu Gandhi, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. A.R. Date of Hearing : 24 . 05 . 2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28 . 06 . 2023 O R D E R Per : Kuld…

Kamlesh Jain & Sons HUF, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-3(2), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 26/RPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R.B. Doshi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT D.R

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54F

…assessee is entitled in law for deduction under section 54F of the Act. 11. The legal proposition is covered by :- - Pr. CIT vs. Akshay Sobti (2020) 423 ITR 321 (Del) - CIT vs. Bharti Mishra (2014) 265 CTR 374 - DCIT vs. Dr. Chalasani Mallikarjuna Rao (2016) 161 ITD 721 (Vskp.) - ACIT vs. Subhash Sevaram Bhavnani (2012) 23 taxmann.com 94 (Ahd.) - CIT vs. J.R. Subramanya Bhatt (1987) 165 ITR 571 - Hill Queen Investment (P) Ltd. vs. Pr. CIT (2021) 62 CCH 70 (Kol. Trib.) - Padam Kumar Jain vs. CIT (2020) 59 CCH 209 (Ranchi) - Magic Landcon LLP & Anr. Vs. Pr. CIT (2020) 204 TTJ 785 (Del) - Karthik Financial Service…

Radharaman Constructions, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle- 19(3), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1582/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm Radharaman Constructions Asst. Cit, Circle – 19(3), Ground Floor, Shri Kunj, Mumbai 3A Altamount Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 026

For Appellant: Dr. K. ShivaramFor Respondent: 27.10.2020

Section 154Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM Radharaman Constructions Asst. CIT, Circle – 19(3), Ground Floor, Shri Kunj, Mumbai 3A Altamount Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 026 PAN/GIR No. AAAAR 3741 A (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant by : Dr. K. Shivaram : Shri Rakesh Ranjan Respondent by : 27.10.2020 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : 05.01.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-59, Mumbai (‘ld.CIT(A) for short) dated 23.01.2019 and…

Sunil Miglani, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5829/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamblesunil Miglani Vs Dcit Kj-2, Kavi Nagar Central Circle New Delhi Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(1)(a)Section 54F(1)(b)

…l vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Siliguri [2019] 69 ITR(T) 231 (Kolkata – Trib.) ii. Anant Chetan Agarwal vs. CIT, [2018] 172 ITD 525 (Lucknow – Trib.) iii. ITO vs. Raj Kumar Parashar [2017] 167 ITD 237 (Jaipur – Trib.) iv. DCIT vs. Dr. Chalasani Mallikarjuna Rao (2016) 161 ITD 721 (Visakhapatnam Trib.) v. Nand Lal Sharma vs. ITO [2015] 40 ITR(T) 518 (Jaipur – Trib.) vi. Dhanveer Singh Gambhir vs. ITO, 3(2), Indore [2015] 56 taxmann.com 205 (Indore – Trib.) vii. Prakash Karnawat vs. ITO (2011) 16 taxmann.com 357 (Jaipur) viii. Gyan Chand Batra vs. ITO [2010] 6 ITR(T) 147 (Jaipur) ix. Raj Babbar vs. ITO (2013) 29 taxmann.com…

Anita Miglani, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5828/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Vanshika Taneja, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(1)(a)Section 54F(1)(b)

Smt. Anita Miglani, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2235/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(1)(a)

Kapil Kumar Agarwal, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2630/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishikapil Kumar Agarwal, Vs. Dcit, C/O. Ipsaa House Anm & Circle-1(1), Associates, J021A, Mayfiled Gurgaoon Gardens, Sector-51, Gurgaon Pan: Aacpa2412L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Sugandha Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 54Section 54F

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kapil Kumar Agarwal, Vs. DCIT, C/o. IPSAA House ANM & Circle-1(1), Associates, J021A, Mayfiled Gurgaoon Gardens, Sector-51, Gurgaon PAN: AACPA2412L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Piyush Kaushik, Adv Revenue by: Smt Sugandha Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07/03/2019 Date of pronouncement 30/04/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee, individual against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 1, Gu…

Gopal Chandra Bose, Hooghly vs. ITO, Ward - 24(1), Hooghly

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1491/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Section 250Section 50CSection 54

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Gopal Chandra Bose.……………..............….……...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….......Appellant 188, Sarat Sarani Bally More Hooghly – 712 103 [PAN : ADUPB 3486 G] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-24(1), Hooghly.……......……….........…………..………….…............Respondent Appearances by: Shri Himadri Mukhopadhyay, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Pijush Mukherjee, JCIT D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : November 29th, 2018 Dat…

Smt. Nilanjana Chakraborti, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 22, Kolkata

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

ITA 2440/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Smt. Nilanjana Chakraborti…………..………...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….....Appellant 99B, Kankulia Road Kolkata – 700 029 [Pan : Acupc 49992 P] Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-22, Kolkata.……......………………..........Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16Th , 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 9Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 03/08/2017, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14, On The Following Grounds:- “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding The Erroneous Determination Of Long Term Capital Gain At Rs.72,50,000/- By Ld. Dcit On Erroneous Belief & Misconception Of Law By Denying The Benefit Claimed U/S 54F Of Income Tax Act, 1961 Of The Appellant. 2. That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Adduce Or Alter Any Ground Or Grounds On Or Before The Hearing Of The Appeal.”

Section 250Section 271(1)(C)Section 50CSection 54Section 54ESection 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Smt. Nilanjana Chakraborti…………..………...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….....Appellant 99B, Kankulia Road Kolkata – 700 029 [PAN : ACUPC 49992 P] Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-22, Kolkata.……......………………..........Respondent Appearances by: Shri Manish Tiwari, A/R, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Sr. D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : October 16t…