Navin Jindal v. ACIT

320 ITR 708Supreme Court of India2010#12621 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 2(14)Section 2(47)Section 234BSection 270ASection 45Section 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 2(42a)section 2(14)short term capital gainsshort term capital gainlong term capital gaintransfersection 143companybusinessinterestsection 14section 143(3)

Judgments citing Navin Jindal v. ACIT

Fort Canning Credit Investments Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Taxation) - 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2104/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Investments Assistant Commissioner Of Pte. Ltd. Income-Tax (International 260 Orchard Road, #14-02 Taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (Pan: Aaccf9284G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Credit Assistant Commissioner Of Investments Pte. Ltd. Income-Tax (International 260 Orchard Road #14-02 Taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (Pan: Aadcf7866R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Ms. Priyanka Agarwala, Ms.Hirali Desai, Ms. Nidhi Agarwal & Shri Yogesh Malpani, Cas Revenue : Shri Satya Pal Kumar, Cit Dr & Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 Fort Canning Investments Pte. Ltd. & Fort Canning Credit Investments Pte. Ltd. Ay 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT DR and Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 270A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Investments Assistant Commissioner of Pte. Ltd. Income-tax (International 260 Orchard Road, #14-02 taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (PAN: AACCF9284G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Credit Assistant Commissioner of Investments Pte. Ltd. Income-tax (International 260 Orchard Road #14-02 taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (PAN: AADCF78…

Fort Canning Investments Pte. Ltd., Singapore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (International Taxation) - 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2103/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Investments Assistant Commissioner Of Pte. Ltd. Income-Tax (International 260 Orchard Road, #14-02 Taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (Pan: Aaccf9284G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Credit Assistant Commissioner Of Investments Pte. Ltd. Income-Tax (International 260 Orchard Road #14-02 Taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (Pan: Aadcf7866R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Ms. Priyanka Agarwala, Ms.Hirali Desai, Ms. Nidhi Agarwal & Shri Yogesh Malpani, Cas Revenue : Shri Satya Pal Kumar, Cit Dr & Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 Fort Canning Investments Pte. Ltd. & Fort Canning Credit Investments Pte. Ltd. Ay 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT DR and Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 270A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Investments Assistant Commissioner of Pte. Ltd. Income-tax (International 260 Orchard Road, #14-02 taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (PAN: AACCF9284G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2022-23 Fort Canning Credit Assistant Commissioner of Investments Pte. Ltd. Income-tax (International 260 Orchard Road #14-02 taxation) - 2(3)(1) Vs. The Heeren, Singapore, Mumbai Singapore – 238855 (PAN: AADCF78…

Milan Saini, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2335/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Milan Saini, Vs. Dcit, 37, Centrum Plaza, Dlf Golf Circle-2. Course Road, Sector 53, Gurgaon Gurgaon (Haryana) Pan: Braps1366P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 17Section 250(6)Section 28

…on behalf of the respondents that a right to 15 subscribe for shares is property and it is a capital asset" (emphasis supplied) c. The legal position in this regard was again confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Navin Jindal vs. ACIT: [2010] 320 ITR 708 (SC) wherein it was held that the 'rights of the existing shareholders to subscribe to additional shares/ debentures is a separate, independent and distinct right which is capable of being transferred'. The relevant observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court are as follows: "8. We find merit in this batch of civil appeals filed by the assessee(s). T…

Isc Speciality Chemicals LLP, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 457/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 45Section 47Section 47A(4)Section 48Section 50BSection 56

…45 and Sec. 48 are to be read together, as the charging section and the computation section constitute one package. Also, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294/5 Taxman 1 and Navin Jindal v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 320 ITR 708/187 Taxman 283 (SC) had observed that for the purposes of Sec. 48 of the Act, one must keep in mind an important principle, namely, that chargeability and computation has to go hand in hand. In other words, computation is an integral part of chargeability under the Act. Now, under Sec. 48 it is laid down, inter alia, that the income chargeable un…

Deputy Commissioner of Incometax, Circle -2(1), Raipur vs. Shri Vaibhav Jain, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 222/RPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 221/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Shri Varun Jain 22-B, South Avenue, Choubey Colony, Raipur (C.G.). Pan : Aggpj1319R ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 222/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Shri Vaibhav Jain 22-B, South Avenue, Choubey Colony, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Akbps4207Q ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By :Shri Amit M Jain, Ar Revenue By :Shri Sanjay Sharma, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Amit M Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 45(3)

…, viz. M/s Vicon Projects cannot be divorced from the point of chargeability of the same i.e the date on which the said capital asset was so transferred is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Navin Jindal Vs. Asst. CIT (2010) 320 ITR 708 (SC). It was observed by the Hon’ble Apex Court that for the purpose of section 48 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which deals with the mode of computation of capital gains, one has to keep in mind the important principle, namely, that chargeability and computation have to go hand in hand. It was further observed by the Hon’ble Court that computatio…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1), Raipur vs. Shri Varun Jain, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 221/RPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 221/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Shri Varun Jain 22-B, South Avenue, Choubey Colony, Raipur (C.G.). Pan : Aggpj1319R ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 222/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Shri Vaibhav Jain 22-B, South Avenue, Choubey Colony, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Akbps4207Q ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By :Shri Amit M Jain, Ar Revenue By :Shri Sanjay Sharma, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Amit M Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 45(3)

…, viz. M/s Vicon Projects cannot be divorced from the point of chargeability of the same i.e the date on which the said capital asset was so transferred is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Navin Jindal Vs. Asst. CIT (2010) 320 ITR 708 (SC). It was observed by the Hon’ble Apex Court that for the purpose of section 48 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which deals with the mode of computation of capital gains, one has to keep in mind the important principle, namely, that chargeability and computation have to go hand in hand. It was further observed by the Hon’ble Court that computatio…

Shri.Suresh Nagaraja Rao Kestur, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-5(3)(3), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 367/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Likith R Prakash, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, ACIT (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 54F

…ce all the co-owners have not signed it. Hence the tax authorities were not justified in placing reliance. 3.4 The Ld.AR in support placed reliance on following decisions:  Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Naveen Jindal vs ACIT reported in (2010) 320 ITR 708;  Decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in CIT vs Ramar rani Kalia reported in (2013) 358 ITR 499;  Decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT vs Ved Prakash & Sons (HUF) 207 ITR 148  Decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CIT vs Suresh Chand Goyal reported in (2008) 298 ITR 277  Decision of Hon’ble Rajastha…

Analjit Singh, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 16(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4737/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Kant

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50D

…res under the pre- amended provisions of the Act. Reference to Miss Dhun Dadabhoi Kapadia (63 ITR 651) refers to renunciation of rights in shares and now in wake of the amendment in section 55(2) negates the effect of this decision. The case of Naveen Jindal (320 ITR 708) deals with the issue of debentures granted on the right basis but the matter relates AY 1992- 93, which again is prior to the amendment made in section 55(2) of the Act. In this case, the narrow issue which arose for consideration of the Court was whether the loss suffered by the appellant was a short term capital loss or a long term one. The qu…

Navin Jindal v. ACIT (320 ITR 708) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax