Jehangir T. Nagree v. ACIT

23 SOT 512Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#9554 most cited

What is Jehangir T. Nagree v. ACIT authority for?

An assessee has the sole discretion to determine when they convert a capital asset into stock-in-trade, which is relevant for the applicability of Section 45(2) of the Income Tax Act. The conversion itself is sufficient to trigger Section 45(2).

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Jehangir T. Nagree v. ACIT · Section 45(2) · capital asset · stock-in-trade · conversion · investment portfolio · trading portfolio · ITAT Mumbai

Judgments citing Jehangir T. Nagree v. ACIT

M/S Futuristic Diagnostic Imaging Centre Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-2(3)(4), Bangalore

In the result the appeal filed by assessee stands dismissed

ITA 259/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Feb 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri G. Venkatesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mathivanan .M, CIT DR
Section 234Section 51

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s. Futuristic Diagnostic Imaging Centre Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No. 4, Sai Prema, Ward – 2[3][4], Vs. 6th Cross, NR Colony, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 019. PAN: AAACF7842E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri G. Venkatesh, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Mathivanan .M, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 14-12-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 18-02-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is filed by assessee against the order date…

Pushap Raj Bohra, Jalore vs. DCIT, Barmer Circle, Barmer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 158/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur20 Mar 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosain(Respondent) Pan: Aanpb 4456 C

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 45(2)Section 54BSection 54F

…CIT(A) had referred following judicial pronouncements. (i) Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi vs. CIT [2012] 26 taxmann.com 84 (All) 8 ITA 158/Jodh/2019 Pushp Raj Bohra Vs DCIT (ii) Ramswaroop Saudagar vs ITO [ITA No 329/JP/2017] (ii) CIT vs Jehangir T. Nagree [2008] 23 SOT 512 (Mum)] There is substantial factual difference in the case of Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi vs. CIT [2012] 26 taxmann.com 84 (All)/[2012] 349 ITR 432 and case under consideration. Though the case was decided on various factual position of that case, Ld. CIT(A) consider it appropriate to mention only one fact similar to present case (in fact even such si…

Ramesh Raj Bhra, Jalore vs. DCIT, Barmer Circle, Barmer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 157/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur20 Mar 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosain(Respondent) Pan: Aappb 7135 G

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 45(2)Section 54BSection 54F

…IT(A) had referred following judicial pronouncements. (i) Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi vs. CIT [2012] 26 taxmann.com 84 (All) 9 ITA 157/Jodh/2019 Ramesh Raj Bohra Vs DCIT (ii) Ramswaroop Saudagar vs ITO [ITA No 329/JP/2017] (ii) CIT vs Jehangir T. Nagree [2008] 23 SOT 512 (Mum)] There is substantial factual difference in the case of Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi vs. CIT [2012] 26 taxmann.com 84 (All) / [2012] 349 ITR 432 and case under consideration. Though the case was decided on various factual position of that case, Ld. CIT(A) consider it appropriate to mention only one fact similar to present case (in fact even su…

ACIT, Circle-8(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Patton Developers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1945/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattcharjee, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Lokesh Kumar Mishra, AR
Section 10(38)Section 24

…vestment portfolio and another of trading portfolio and section 45(2) of the Act also provides that assessee can convert its capital assets in stock-in-trade. The Ld. CIT(A) has made reference to the following judgments :- i) ACIT v. Jehangir T. Nagree (2008) 23 SOT 512 (Mumbai) ii) CIT v. Walfort Share And Stock Brokers P. Ltd. (2010) 326 ITR 1 (SC) iii) Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 796 (SC) 10. Now aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 11. We have heard rival parties and perused the materials available on record. Before us Ld. DR supported t…

Mahaveer Yadav, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 209/JPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Feb 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (Addl.CIT)
Section 2(14)

…assessed by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the order of the first appellate authority was to be upheld.” 22. In this regard, reference can also be drawn to the decision of the Cordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of Jehangir T. Nagree vs ACIT [2008] 23 SOT 512 (Mum) wherein it was held as under: “….From a careful perusal of the relevant provisions of section 45(2) of the Act, we find that there should be the conversion of investment or capital asset by the owner as stock in trade of a business carried on by him. The words 'business carried on by the assessee' does not mean that before conversion of inve…

Pradeep Vatrana, Alwar vs. DCIT, Alwar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 930/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Feb 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri P. P. Meena (JCIT)
Section 54

…n assessed by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the order of the first appellate authority was to be upheld.” 9. In this regard, reference can also be drawn to the decision of the Cordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of Jehangir T. Nagree vs ACIT [2008] 23 SOT 512 (Mum) wherein it was held as under: “….From a careful perusal of the relevant provisions of section 45(2) of the Act, we find that there should be the conversion of investment or capital asset by the owner as stock in trade of a business carried on by him. The words 'business carried on by the assessee' does not mean that before conversion of inve…

Addl. CIT, Ghaziabad vs. M/S. Amrit Corp Ltd., Ghaziabad

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5337/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Rohit Garg, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, DR
Section 45(2)

…t into/as stock in trade is relevant to determine the applicability of section 45(2) of the Act and nothing else. 3.09 The Ld. AR also invited the Bench’s attention to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jehangir T. Nagree: [2008] 23 SOT 512 (MUM) wherein the Tribunal held that under section 45(2) of the Act it was the sweet will of the assessee to decide as to when he intended to convert his investment into stock in trade. 3.010 As regards the observations of the assessing officer, and also affirmed by Ld. CIT(Appeals), that since the assessee had applied for/ obtained permission…

Amrit Corp Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. Addl. CIT, Ghaziabad

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4579/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Rohit Garg, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, DR
Section 45(2)

…t into/as stock in trade is relevant to determine the applicability of section 45(2) of the Act and nothing else. 3.09 The Ld. AR also invited the Bench’s attention to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jehangir T. Nagree: [2008] 23 SOT 512 (MUM) wherein the Tribunal held that under section 45(2) of the Act it was the sweet will of the assessee to decide as to when he intended to convert his investment into stock in trade. 3.010 As regards the observations of the assessing officer, and also affirmed by Ld. CIT(Appeals), that since the assessee had applied for/ obtained permission…

Addl. CIT, Ghaziabad vs. M/S Amrit Corp Ltd., Ghaziabad

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2163/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Rohit Garg, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, DR
Section 45(2)

…t into/as stock in trade is relevant to determine the applicability of section 45(2) of the Act and nothing else. 3.09 The Ld. AR also invited the Bench’s attention to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jehangir T. Nagree: [2008] 23 SOT 512 (MUM) wherein the Tribunal held that under section 45(2) of the Act it was the sweet will of the assessee to decide as to when he intended to convert his investment into stock in trade. 3.010 As regards the observations of the assessing officer, and also affirmed by Ld. CIT(Appeals), that since the assessee had applied for/ obtained permission…

Amrit Corp Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. Addl. CIT, Ghaziabad

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1789/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09

For Appellant: S/Shri Rohit Jain, Rohit Garg, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, DR
Section 45(2)

…t into/as stock in trade is relevant to determine the applicability of section 45(2) of the Act and nothing else. 3.09 The Ld. AR also invited the Bench’s attention to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jehangir T. Nagree: [2008] 23 SOT 512 (MUM) wherein the Tribunal held that under section 45(2) of the Act it was the sweet will of the assessee to decide as to when he intended to convert his investment into stock in trade. 3.010 As regards the observations of the assessing officer, and also affirmed by Ld. CIT(Appeals), that since the assessee had applied for/ obtained permission…

D.C.I.T. Cir - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S Patton Developers Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 90/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10 Dcit, Circle-8, Aayakar V/S. Patton Developers Pvt. Bhawan, 5Th Floor, P-7, Ltd., 3C, Camac Street, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 016 Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aabct 2076 H] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 24Section 24(1)(vi)

…estment portfolio and another of trading portfolio and section 45(2) of the Act also provides that assessee can convert its capital assets in stock-in- trade. The Ld. CIT(A) has made reference to the following judgments :- i) ACIT v. Jehangir T. Nagree (2008) 23 SOT 512 (Mumbai) ii) CIT v. Walfort Share And Stock Brokers P. Ltd. (2010) 326 ITR 1 (SC) iii) Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 796 (SC) 10. Now aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 11. We have heard rival parties and perused the materials available on record. Before us Ld. DR supported t…

Jehangir T. Nagree v. ACIT (23 SOT 512) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax