Ltd Vs CIT 120 ITR 549 (SC). (ii) Member for Board of Agricultural Income Tax, Assam v. Sindhurani Chaudhurani & Other (32 ITR 169)

Q: What is Ltd Vs CIT 120 ITR 549 (SC). (ii) Member for Board of Agricultural Income Tax, Assam v. Sindhurani Chaudhurani & Other authority for?

A lump sum payment made by a prospective tenant to a landlord for the settlement of agricultural land and the parting of certain rights, paid before the landlord-tenant relationship is established, is a capital payment and not rent.

Q: How many judgments cite Ltd Vs CIT 120 ITR 549 (SC). (ii) Member for Board of Agricultural Income Tax, Assam v. Sindhurani Chaudhurani & Other?

38 judgments on BharatTax cite Ltd Vs CIT 120 ITR 549 (SC). (ii) Member for Board of Agricultural Income Tax, Assam v. Sindhurani Chaudhurani & Other (32 ITR 169), spanning 2008 to 2024.

M/S. Mahindra Residential Developers Ltd., Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Corporate Ward - 4 (1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13, 2013-14

ITA 338/CHNY/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.870/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.338 & 339/Chny/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan-For Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.870/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.338 & 339/Chny/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 v. M/s.Mahindra Residential- The ITO, Developers Ltd., Corporate Ward-4(1), Administrative Block, Chennai. Mahindra World City, Natham Sub-Post Office-603 004. Chengalpattu. [PAN: AAFCM 4258 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant…

M/S New Mangalore Port Trust vs. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax

Appeal is disposed of

ITA/227/2016HC Karnataka31 Oct 2022

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

Section 260

…e which mandates the assesse to provide services. Therefore, the assessee is getting income in the relevant financial year. In support of this contention, he placed reliance on the judgment of 5 (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) - 8 - ITA No. 227 of 2016 Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax & ANR Vs. H.S. Ramachandra Rao6. 10. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused records. 11. In the first three questions, the issue involved is whether the assessee is entitled to amo…

Income-Tax Officer vs. Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority, Pune

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 945/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…ipt to be taxed in the year under consideration, which goes to prove that the nature of receipt is revenue. Reference was made to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. Sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) and it was held as under by Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh:- ―34. In the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) the Salamis/Premium were not at all dependent on the payment of the rent charged whereas, in the instant case, the land premium is nothing but advance rent fully de…

Income-Tax Officer vs. Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority, Pune

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 944/PUN/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…ipt to be taxed in the year under consideration, which goes to prove that the nature of receipt is revenue. Reference was made to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. Sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) and it was held as under by Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh:- ―34. In the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) the Salamis/Premium were not at all dependent on the payment of the rent charged whereas, in the instant case, the land premium is nothing but advance rent fully de…

Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 932/PUN/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…ipt to be taxed in the year under consideration, which goes to prove that the nature of receipt is revenue. Reference was made to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. Sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) and it was held as under by Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh:- ―34. In the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) the Salamis/Premium were not at all dependent on the payment of the rent charged whereas, in the instant case, the land premium is nothing but advance rent fully de…

Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 931/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…ipt to be taxed in the year under consideration, which goes to prove that the nature of receipt is revenue. Reference was made to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. Sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) and it was held as under by Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh:- ―34. In the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) the Salamis/Premium were not at all dependent on the payment of the rent charged whereas, in the instant case, the land premium is nothing but advance rent fully de…

Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 930/PUN/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…ipt to be taxed in the year under consideration, which goes to prove that the nature of receipt is revenue. Reference was made to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. Sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) and it was held as under by Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh:- ―34. In the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) the Salamis/Premium were not at all dependent on the payment of the rent charged whereas, in the instant case, the land premium is nothing but advance rent fully de…

Pimpri Chinchwad New Town Development Authority, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed and cross objections and appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 929/PUN/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.929 To 932/Pun/2014 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2003-04 To 2005-06 & 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Kishore PhadkeFor Respondent: Ms Nandita Kanchan, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

…ipt to be taxed in the year under consideration, which goes to prove that the nature of receipt is revenue. Reference was made to decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. Sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) and it was held as under by Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh:- ―34. In the case of Member of the Board of Agricultural Income-tax v. sindhur Chaudhurani (1957) 32 ITR 169 (SC) the Salamis/Premium were not at all dependent on the payment of the rent charged whereas, in the instant case, the land premium is nothing but advance rent fully de…