Gopal C. Sharma v. CIT

209 ITR 946High Court1994#5111 most cited

What is Gopal C. Sharma v. CIT authority for?

The potential for non-agricultural use or the purchaser's intention does not alter the agricultural character of land for capital gains purposes if it was agricultural at the time of sale and prior use. Market conditions leading to a high price do not change the essential nature of the land.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Gopal C. Sharma v. CIT · agricultural land · capital asset · section 2(14)(iii) · period of holding · transfer of capital asset · potential use · market value

Also reported as

72 Taxmann 353

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 2(14)Section 10(37)Section 139(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147

Issues it is cited on

section 2(14)(iii)(b)section 2(14)(iii)(a)section 2(13)section 2(14)(iii)section 63section 54bsection 2(14)period of holdingsection 65transfer of capital assetput to usesection 139(4)

Judgments citing Gopal C. Sharma v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Mahesh Danabhai Patel, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1534/PUN/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 1534/Pun/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 54Section 54B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “ए” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE "ी अ"नल चतुव"द", लेखा सद"य, एवं "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1534/PUN/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Malegaon Circle, Malegaon. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Shri Mahesh Danabhai Patel, 8, Pournima Housing Society, Station Road, Dwarka, Dist. Nashik-422 011 PAN : ABKPP4549C ……""यथ" / Respondent Revenue by : Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT Assessee by : Shri Pramod Shingte सुनवा…

Smt.Anusuyamma, Bangalore vs. ITO-Ward-4(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2227/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Laliet Kumarsmt.Anusuyamma, # 8/1, Beml Township, Gm Palya, New Thippasandra Post, Bengaluru-560075. … Appellant Pan:Aiopa 0312 D Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 4(3)(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Kamaladhar, Standing Counsel
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Smt.Anusuyamma, # 8/1, BEML Township, GM Palya, New Thippasandra Post, Bengaluru-560075. … Appellant PAN:AIOPA 0312 D Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 4(3)(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant by : Shri V.Srinivasan, Advocate. Respondent by : Shri G.Kamaladhar, Standing Counsel Date of hearing : 02/03/2017 Date of pronouncement : 26/04/2017 O R D E R Per INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the CIT(A)-4, Bengaluru,…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Mansi Finance Chennai Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1560/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddy

For Appellant: Shri. A.B. Koli, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.A
Section 133(6)Section 2(14)

…tial non- agricultural value of the land for which a purchaser may be prepared to pay a large price would not detract from its character as agricultural land on the relevant date of sale. 7.12 We may also refer to the case of Gopal C. Sharma v. CIT [1994] 209 ITR 946/72 Taxman 353(Bom), in which, the case of Smt. Sarifabibi Mohamed Ibrahim (supra) was referred to and relied, amongst other cases. In this case, the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court has stated that the profit motive of the assessee selling the land without anything more by itself can never be decisive for determination of the issue as to…