Harbans Singh v. CIT Amritsar-I

132 ITR 77Reported decision1981#22511 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Judgments citing Harbans Singh v. CIT Amritsar-I

VAIJANTI JAIN,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-40(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 746/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Vaijanti Jain, Vs Ito, C-407, 2Nd Floor, Saraswati Ward-40(3), Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi-110034. New Delhi. Pan-Aaafpj5260J Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms.Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri Sumesh Swani, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 06.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30.01.2023

…e, cannot give rise to the conclusion that the transaction is an adventure in the nature of trade. Our attention was pointedly drawn by the learned counsel for the Revenue to a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Harbans Singh v. CIT 9 | P a g e [1981] 132 ITR 77. But that decision is of no assistance to the Revenue as the facts of that case are entirely different and on the facts found in that case, the view -was rightly taken that it was an adventure in the nature of trade. There can be no gainsaying that even a single venture may be regarded as a trade or business, but there have to be circumstances whi…

SANJAY J AHUJA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(3)(4), MUMBAI

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

ITA 5731/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Ramlal Negishri Sanjay J. Ahuja, 202, Flat No.11, Shahnaj Building, New New India Bank, S.V.Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 Pan:Adepa 2739H ...... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer 19(3)(4), Piramal Chambers, Parel Mumbai 400 011 .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhatFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Kardam

Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAMLAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Sanjay J. Ahuja, 202, Flat No.11, Shahnaj Building, New New India Bank, S.V.Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 PAN:ADEPA 2739H ...... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer 19(3)(4), Piramal Chambers, Parel Mumbai 400 011 .... Respondent Appellant by : Shri Haridas Bhat Respondent by : Shri A.K.Kardam Date of hearing : 17/10/2016 Date of pronouncement : 09/12/2016 ORDER PER B.R.BASKARAN,A.M: The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order da…

KRISHAN KUMAR SARAF,BHIWANI vs. CIT, HISAR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4562/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Ms. Suchitra Kamble :Asstt. Yr: 2007-08 Krishan Kumar Saraf, Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, S/0 Sh. Brij Lal Saraf, Hissar. Bichla Bazar, Near City Police Stationj, Bhiwani. Pan: Amqps 3147J ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri N.K. Jain Adv. Respondent By : Ms. Sulekha Verma Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 07/09/2015. Date Of Order : 24/09/2015. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri N.K. Jain AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sulekha Verma CIT (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 69

…r RS.31 ,98,000/- constructed on 381.04 sq. yard portion of this land. The assessee has declared long term capital gain at Rs.22,62,575/- from this transaction. In view of Punjab & Haryana High Court's decision in the case of Harbans Singh Vs. CIT Amritsar-I (132 ITR 77 & 23 CTR 335) and Supreme Court's decision in the case of Raja J. Rarneshwar Rao Vs. CIT Hydrabad cited in 42 ITR 179), the income earned from the transaction of purchasing plot of lands, constructing shops thereon and selling those shops should have been treated as business income instead of Long Term Capital Gain, but the A.O. failed to do so an…