Gopee Nath Paul And Sons And Another v. DCIT

278 ITR 240High Court2005#11416 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127 Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 144C(13)Section 153(1)Section 37

Judgments citing Gopee Nath Paul And Sons And Another v. DCIT

Zarah Rafique Malik, Mumbai vs. ITO (Int Tax) Ward-3(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5159/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Hon’Blezarah Rafique Malik Income Tax Officer, (Int.Tax) B/1703, Vivarea Condominium, Ward- 3(2)(1), Mumbai Vs. Sane Guruji Marg, Jacob Circle, Mahalaxmi East Mumbai – 400 011 Pan : Adcpm8960G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K Gopal, Adv. & Shri Oom KandalkarFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 153(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “I”, MUMBAI Before Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’ble President & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Hon’ble Accountant Member Zarah Rafique Malik Income Tax Officer, (INT.TAX) B/1703, Vivarea Condominium, Ward- 3(2)(1), Mumbai Vs. Sane Guruji Marg, Jacob Circle, Mahalaxmi East Mumbai – 400 011 PAN : ADCPM8960G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri K Gopal, Adv. & Shri Oom Kandalkar Respondent By : Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 21.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 10.03.2026 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : By this appeal, appellant-assessee…

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

…ransfer of the property to M/s. Synergy Mura Realty Private Limited leading to capital gains and hence cannot qualify for deduction u/s. 48 of the Act. 1.4. The facts and circumstances of the relied upon decision in the case of Gopeenath Paul & Sons Vs. DCIT (278 ITR 240) is distinguishable from that of the case on hand. 2.1 The CIT(A) erred in allowing the compensation paid to Sri Aravind Enterprises and M/s. B. J. Textile Company Ltd. when major portion of the shares in both the entities are held by the assessee and his family members. 2.2 The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee had not furnished any…

Neptune Polymers Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, Ground Number 5 of the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 249/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R

Section 250

…e was placed before Ld. CIT(Appeals) in support of the above arguments. He also contended that Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in restricting the net profit to 2.5% of the turnover. The counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the case of Gopee Nath Paul & Sons 278 ITR 240 (Calcutta), wherein it was held that where in the instant case, without removing the liability of the bank, the title of the purchaser could not be perfected. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and the position in law, the meeting of the liability of the bank relating to the assets of ‘GS’ was an expenditure incurred wholly…

Perfect Thread Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 8(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 349/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble&

For Appellant: Department by Shri Mehul Jain

…n High Court Order as such bank had pre existing overriding title on company’s fixed assets. (c) The learned CIT (A) has failed to appreciate the judicial pronouncement of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Gopee Nath Paul & Sons vs. Deputy CIT [2005] 278 ITR 240 where it was held that on the sale of firm’s business as a going concern the amount paid to banks to have the charge lifted was treated the expenses in relation to transfer. 3. The appellant craves leave to right of alter, amend and add the grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal” 4. Brief facts related to the grounds of appeal rais…

Devendra Kumar Shroff, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-7(2), Kolkata

ITA 158/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: "ीजे. सुधाकररे"डी, लेखासद"यएवं/And"ीऐ. ट". वक","यायीकसद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

…on of deduction from the full value of consideration, the situation in the case of Smt. ThressiammaAbraham(supra) was diversion of amounts at source by overriding the title. c) Thereafter, the ld. AR cited the case of GopeeNath Paul & Sons Vs. Dy. CIT (2005) 278 ITR 240 (Cal) and drawn our attention to the facts of the case recorded by the Hon'ble High Court in the following words: "It appears from the materials on record that there was a suit between the Allahabad Bank and Gobindo Sheet Metal. In the said suit the Allahabad Bank claimed certain amount to the extent of Rs. 25,00,000 approx. on account of Gobind…

Perfect Thread Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4964/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu Vice Presedent,(As) Shri D. Karunakar Rao & Shri Amit Shukla, Sh. Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarperfect Thread Mills Ltd Vs Dcit, 8(2), Mumbai 201, Millenium Plaza Behind Sakinaka Telephone Exchange, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 72 Pan: Aaacp6449E Appellant Respondednt

Section 13(2)Section 143(3)Section 255(4)Section 48

…wards principal amount of loans as the bank had existing overriding title on the company's assets. (c) The Ld CIT (A) has failed to appreciate the judicial pronouncement of Hon'be Calcutta High Court in the case of Gopee Nath Paul & Sons vs. Deputy CIT [2005] 278 ITR 240 where it was held that on the sale of firm's business as a going concern the amount paid to banks to have the charge lifted was treated the expenses in relation to transfer. " Briefly stated relevant facts of the case are that the assessee is a 2. manufacturer of cotton / polyster sewing and industrial threads and also engaged in processing of c…

M/S. Sivanandha Mills Ltd., Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2106/CHNY/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT

Section 143Section 143(1)

…rt of sale consideration but deductible while computing capital gain. Similar view was taken by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Abrar Alvi (247 ITR 312). Further, Calcutta High Court in the case of Gopee Nath Paul And Sons And Another v. DCIT (278 ITR 240), held that the criteria is the perfection of title in order to effect the sale. In that case, without removing the liability of the Allahabad Bank, the title of the purchaser could not be perfected. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of that case and the position in law, the meeting of the liability of the Allahabad Bank relating to…

Sivanandha Mills Limited, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1216/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT

Section 143Section 143(1)

Cifco Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7875/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.7875/Mum/2010 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2006-07) Cifco Ltd, बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 3(1)(1), Bhupen Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Dalal Street, M K Road, Fort, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400023 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 50

…availing of the loan and hence the loan amount should be considered as encumbrance attached to the property. In this regard, he placed reliance on the decision rendered by the Hon‟ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Gopee Nath Paul and Sons V/s DCIT (2005) 278 ITR 240 (Calcutta). 9. On the contrary, the ld D.R submitted that the amount borrowed by the assessee has got no relation with the title of the property and hence the same cannot be considered as Cost of transfer. 10. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record as well as the decisions relied upon by the assessee. The decision rendered by…