Income Tax Officer v. Orchid Griha Nirman (P) Ltd.

134 Taxmann.com 281High Court2022#22426 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 352,026 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2023.

Read the full judgment

Judgments citing Income Tax Officer v. Orchid Griha Nirman (P) Ltd.

Sai Teja Constructions, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 652/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy, CIT(DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 45(3)Section 48

…Sai Teja Constructions Ltd Hyderabad therefore, no capital gain is chargeable u/s 45 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 14. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Income Tax Officer vs. Orchid Griha Nirman (P) Ltd reported in (2022) 134 Taxmann.com 281 (Cal.), he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that the section 45(3) would be applicable only in respect of a capital asset and not to stock-in-trade. It has been held in the said decision that where a land was brought in a firm at its cost as current asset and said firm upon receipt of the said land also…

Sai Teja Constructions, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 651/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy, CIT(DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 45(3)Section 48

…Sai Teja Constructions Ltd Hyderabad therefore, no capital gain is chargeable u/s 45 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 14. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Income Tax Officer vs. Orchid Griha Nirman (P) Ltd reported in (2022) 134 Taxmann.com 281 (Cal.), he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that the section 45(3) would be applicable only in respect of a capital asset and not to stock-in-trade. It has been held in the said decision that where a land was brought in a firm at its cost as current asset and said firm upon receipt of the said land also…

Sai Teja Constructions, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle 8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 877/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy, CIT(DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 45(3)Section 48

…Sai Teja Constructions Ltd Hyderabad therefore, no capital gain is chargeable u/s 45 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 14. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Income Tax Officer vs. Orchid Griha Nirman (P) Ltd reported in (2022) 134 Taxmann.com 281 (Cal.), he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that the section 45(3) would be applicable only in respect of a capital asset and not to stock-in-trade. It has been held in the said decision that where a land was brought in a firm at its cost as current asset and said firm upon receipt of the said land also…