Gyanchand Batra v. ITO

49 SOT 160Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#17987 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 139 Section 142 Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 147 Section 148 Section 149 Section 271(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 50c(1)full value of consideration section 54f section 48 section 50c section 54 section 50 section 45 long term capital gain section 139 transfer section 13

Judgments citing Gyanchand Batra v. ITO

Lal Chand Meena, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 5(2), Jaipur

ITA 1074/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Anoop Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 50CSection 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1074/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 cuke Lal Chand Meena ITO, Vs. S/o Dhanna Lal Meena Ward 5(2), D-40, Uniyara Garden, Jaipur Opp. Uniyara Hospital MD Road, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AUXPM0213G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Anoop Bhatia, CA jkt…

Nanag Ram Meena, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 6(4), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is partly allowed as indicated

ITA 1398/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Issuing The Notice U/S 148. The Action Of The Ld. Ao Was Illegal & Therefore Deserves To Be Quashed Or Set Aside. 2

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Gupta, CA andFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT -DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री गगन गोयल लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1398/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Nanag Ram Meena Block No. A-1, Badgoti Bhawan, Tonk Road, Amali Kothi, Surya Nagar, TonkRoad, Jaipur बनाम Vs. The ACIT Circle-1 Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AFDPM 4068 A अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Vijay Gupta, CA and Ms. Ape…

Shri Lalit Kumar Kalwar, Sarwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ajmer

ITA 894/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT) a

Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

…50C. Therefore, the provisions of s. 50C(1) are not applicable to s. 54F for the purpose of determining the meaning of full value of consideration.—Gyanchand Batra vs. ITO (2010) 45 DTR (Jp)(Trib) 41 : (2010) 133 TTJ (Jp) 482, Prakash Karnawat vs. ITO (2012) 49 SOT 160 (Jp) and Nand Lal Sharma vs. ITO (2015) 122 DTR (Jp)(Trib) 404 : (2015) 172 TTJ (Jp) 412 followed; Gouli Mahadevappa vs. ITO & Anr. (2013) 259 CTR (Kar) 579: (2013) 88 DTR (Kar) 59 : (2013) 356 ITR 90 (Kar) distinguished.” 8 Shri Lalit Kumar Kalwar vs. ITO Thus in our view also the natural meaning of full value of consideration refers to consid…

Pankajbhai Hathibhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3), Surat

ITA 589/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपील सं./Ita No.589/Srt/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Pankajbhai Hathibhai Patel Income Tax Officer, 112, Sangath Mall 1, Ward-6(3), Surat Vs. Opp. Govt. Engineering College, Motera, Ahmedabad-380005 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aazpp 0099 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant ) (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-D.R

Section 143(3)Section 23Section 48Section 50CSection 54Section 54E

…le for deduction u/s 54F. I have perused the provisions of section 54F and the decisions of Hon'ble ITAT Jaipur. The Hon'ble ITAT Jaipur in its ITA No.589/SRT/2019 A.Y. 11-12 Pankajbhai H Patel decision in the case of Prakash Karnawat v/s ITO Ward 6, Jaipur (49 SOT 160 (Jaipur) has considered the above provision and also earlier decisions of Hon'ble ITAT Jaipur Bench & the order of the Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore. The Hon'ble ITAT relies on decision of Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore in the case of Gouli Mahadevappa ITA No.587/Bang/2009 dated 16.07.2010. the Hon'ble ITAT Bangalore in para 8.22 has illustrated how to work out…

Shri Naresh Kumar Golchha, Katni vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jabalpur

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 90/JAB/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur03 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2013-14 Shri Naresh Kumar Golchha V. Pr. C.I.T.-2 C/O Samapat Lal & Sons Jabalpur Raghunath Ganj Katni Tan/Pan:Afhpg3398F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Dr. H. S. Modh, Advocate Respondent By: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 02 04 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 03 04 2019

For Appellant: Dr. H. S. Modh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 48Section 50CSection 54E

…to Rs.8,52,000/-. The Pr. C.I.T. observed that the taxable capital gain worked out to Rs.39,29,800/-, and that the A.O. had gone wrong in determining the same at Nil. 4. As before the Pr. C.I.T., the assessee has placed reliance on ‘Prakash Karnawat vs. ITO', 49 SOT 160 (Jaipur-Trib.). It has been contended that the Pr. C.I.T. has erred in holding that the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of ‘Gouli Mahadevappa vs. ITO', 356 ITR 90 (Karn) is applicable and not that of the Jaipur Bench of the Tribunal (supra), itself shows that there are two views possible in the matter and that as such, ips…