PCIT v. Vembu Vaidyanathan

108 Taxmann.com 339Supreme Court of India2019#8149 most cited
13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54Section 142(1)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(2)

Issues it is cited on

period of holdingindexed cost of acquisitionsection 54date of transfershort term capital gaingross total incomelong term capital gainincome from other sourcestransfersection 143(2)section 142(1)prescribed

Judgments citing PCIT v. Vembu Vaidyanathan

ARVINDER SINGH SAHNI,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 13(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the Assessee’s Appeal is allowed

ITA 6778/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Jagadish

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Punjabi, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan (Sr. DR.)
Section 250Section 54

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. No.6778/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Arvinder Singh Sahni, 23 Deputy Commissioner of 23, Shree Industrial Income-tax, Circle – Premises, 2nd Hasnabad Vs. 13(2)(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Lane, Santacruz (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai – Mumbai – 400050. 400020. (Appellant) : (Respondent) PAN No. AAVPS 3529 D Present for: Assessee by : Ms. Ritu Punjabi, Ld. Adv Revenue by : Shri Surendra Mohan (Sr. DR.) Date of Hearing : 17.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 12.03.2026…

PRADIP KUMAR ROY,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(7), HMT BHAVAN, BELLARY ROAD

The Appeal is allowed and addition is restricted to the extent of Rs

ITA 2270/BANG/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice –Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Pradip Kumar Roy, Flat Number B705, The Income Tax Officer, Mantri Tranquil, Ward-5(3)(7), Off Kanakapura Road, Gubbalala, Vs. Bengaluru. Bengaluru, Karnataka – 560 061. Pan: Acxpr1547G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Kumar, CA
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 54Section 68Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Pradip Kumar Roy, Flat Number B705, The Income Tax Officer, Mantri Tranquil, Ward-5(3)(7), Off Kanakapura Road, Gubbalala, Vs. Bengaluru. Bengaluru, Karnataka – 560 061. PAN: ACXPR1547G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Praveen Kumar, CA : Shri Ganesh R Ghale - Advocate, Standing Revenue by Counsel for Revenue Date of Hearing : 15-12-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 06-02-2026 ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT 1. ITA No. 2270/Bang/2025 is filed by Shri Prad…

BRAJ KISHORE SINGH,ANDHERI EAST vs. ASSESSING OFFICER INT. TAX WARD 4(2)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is accordingly partly allowed for statistical

ITA 1011/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanbraj Kishore Singh Vs. Assessing Officer 604, Lantana, Nahar Amrit Internatinal Tax Ward Shakti, Chandivali, 4(2)91) Maharashtra -400 072. Room No. 632, Kautilya Bhavan, Pan: Bqips8474H C-41 To C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051

Section 142(1)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(2)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Braj Kishore Singh Vs. Assessing Officer 604, Lantana, Nahar Amrit Internatinal Tax Ward Shakti, Chandivali, 4(2)91) Maharashtra -400 072. Room No. 632, Kautilya Bhavan, PAN: BQIPS8474H C-41 to C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Suresh Kumar Gundher / Shri Abhishek Bothra, Ld. ARs. Department Represented by : Shri Krishna Kumar, Ld. DR Date of conclusion of Hearing : 16.06.2025 Da…

ANAND SWARUP MEHTA ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAX)-3(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes\nin the above terms

ITA 851/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
Section 111ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nMUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI\nBEFORE MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND\nSHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA NO. 851/MUM/2025 (A.Y: 2022-23)\nAnand Swarup Mehta Vs. ITO (Internatinal Tax) – 3\nC/o-Dhruva Advisors LLP, 11101,\nOne World Centre, 11th floor, Tower\n2B, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg,\nElphinstone Road (west), Mumbai-\n400 013\nPAN: AACPM9736F\n(Appellant)\nAssessee Represented by\nDepartment Represented by\nDate of conclusion of Hearing\nDate of Pronouncement\n(Respondent)\nORDER\nPER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (J.M.):\n1. This appeal is filed by…

SUCHETA OUMEYA KALE ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 42(3)(4), MUMBAI

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

ITA 395/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainsucheta Oumeya Kale Vs. Ito, Ward – 42(3)(4) 25-B, Goodwill Bldg, Kautilya Bhavan, Manmala Tank Road, Mahim Bkc, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400 016. Mumbai – 400 051. Pan/Gir No. Aappk0489A (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sucheta Oumeya Kale Vs. ITO, Ward – 42(3)(4) 25-B, Goodwill Bldg, Kautilya Bhavan, Manmala Tank road, Mahim BKC, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400 016. Mumbai – 400 051. PAN/GIR No. AAPPK0489A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ketan Vjani Revenue by Shri Avinash Karpe, Sr. Ld.DR Date of Hearing 29.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 27.05.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 11.11.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961…

TANVI SANDEEP MATHUR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 20/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 151(2)Section 54

…ITA No.20/Ahd/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Page 1 of 9 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 Tanvi Sandeep Mathur, The Deputy Commissioner of C/o. M.S. Chhajed & Co., Income Tax, “Kamal Shanti”, Circle – 7(1), Beside Bank of Baroda, Ahmedabad. Nr. Sardar Patel Under Bridge, Vs. Naranpura, Ahmedabad – 380 014. [PAN – ANFPM 6538 D] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Hem Chhajed, AR (VH) Revenue by Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11.07.2024 Date of Prono…

INDIRA GIRI,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARMENT JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 511/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: The Due Date Of Furnishing Itr, Therefore Deposit In Capital Gain Account For Compliance U/S 54(2) Was Impossible On The Part Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Manik (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 511/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 cuke Indira Giri Assessing Officer, 1287, Mali Mohalla, outside Vs. Ward-2(5), Income Tax Office, Jaipur. Chandpole Gate, Jaipur. . LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABBPG 7713 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Ma…

DILSHAD AHMED RANGREJ ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1687/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am Dilshad Ahmed Rangrej Cit, E2 Building No. 11, Sai Mahal Chs Ltd, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Sector 48, Seawood, Nerul, Navi Vs. Delhi Mumbai-400 706

For Appellant: Sh. Shahank MehtaFor Respondent: Sh. Ujjawal Chavan,SR AR
Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 54Section 56

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM Dilshad Ahmed Rangrej CIT, E2 Building No. 11, Sai Mahal Chs Ltd, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Sector 48, Seawood, Nerul, Navi Vs. Delhi Mumbai-400 706 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AFVPR0207E Assessee by : Sh. Shahank Mehta Revenue by : Sh. Ujjawal Chavan,SR AR Date of hearing: 22.09.2022 Date of pronouncement : 19/12/2022 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2014-15 against the appellate order passed by the National Faceless Appellate Centre [The learned C…

KIRAN KAUR KOHLI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-53(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1062/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhavi, Ld. CAFor Respondent: ShriAnujGarg, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 2(47)Section 250Section 54Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 KiranKaurKohli, VersuS ACIT, Circle 53(1), 47, JorBagh, New New Delhi Delhi. PAN: AAIPK8725G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri R.S. Singhavi, Ld. CA ShriRajatGarg, Ld. CA Respondent by : ShriAnujGarg, Ld. Sr. DR Date of hearing : 13.07.2022 Date of order : 28.07.2022 ORDER PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J.M. This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 25.02.2020, impugned herein, passed by the learned Commissi…

GURBAKSHISH SINGH BATRA,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT - 12, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 396/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17 Gurbakshish Singh Batra, Vs Pr.Cit-12, E-1511, Wazir Nagr, New Delhi. Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi. Pan: Adspb2480J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Shashi Bhushan Sukla, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd March, 2021 Of The Pcit, Delhi-12, Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 6Th October, 2016 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.44,86,160/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The It Act. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For ‘Limited Scrutiny’ Based On The Following Reasons:-

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shashi Bhushan Sukla, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 263Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : C : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Gurbakshish Singh Batra, Vs Pr.CIT-12, E-1511, Wazir Nagr, New Delhi. Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi. PAN: ADSPB2480J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri R.S. Singhvi, CA Revenue by : Shri Shashi Bhushan Sukla, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 15.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22nd March, 2021 of the PCIT, Delhi-12, passed u/s 263 of the…

ACIT, NCC - -9(1),, CHENNAI vs. SHRI BIJI KURIEN,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Aug 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 06/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & C.O. No. 12/Chny/2020 [In I.T.A. No. 06/Chny/2020] The Assistant Commissioner Of Shri Biji Kurien, Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 9(1), Vs. A 025, Commanders Court, Room No. 211, 2Nd Floor, Wanaparthy Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Block, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 008. Chennai 600 006. [Pan:Addpk6148H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.V. Radhakrishna, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Radhakrishna, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 53ASection 54

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मऺजुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 06/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & C.O. No. 12/Chny/2020 [In I.T.A. No. 06/Chny/2020] The Assistant Commissioner of Shri Biji Kurien, Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 9(1), Vs. A 025, Commanders Court, Room No. 211, 2nd Floor, Wanaparthy Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Block, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 008. Chennai 600 006. [PAN:ADDPK6…

SHRI MURALI M. NATARAJAN,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NCC-21,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2811/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2811/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Murali M. Natrajan, The Deputy Commissioner Of 7, Rams Apartments, 78A, Ttk Road, Vs. Income Tax, Opp. Alwarpet Post Office, Non Corporate Circle 21 Chennai 600 018. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aanpm2599P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Satish R. Mody, Advocate : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 04.08.2021 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai, Dated 25.07.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Only Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Whether The Date Of Allotment Of Flat Or Date Of Acquisition Of The Property Has To Be Taken Into Consideration For Computing Capital Gain Tax.

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मऺजुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2811/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Murali M. Natrajan, The Deputy Commissioner of 7, Rams Apartments, 78A, TTK Road, Vs. Income Tax, Opp. Alwarpet Post Office, Non Corporate Circle 21 Chennai 600 018. Chennai 600 034. [PAN: AANPM2599P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by Shri Satish R. Mody, Adv…

SHRI D R KUMARASWAMY ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(3)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2958/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B.R.Ramesh, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 54F

…cluded that the assessee shall be deemed to have acquired rights in the property on the date of issue of allotment letter for the purposes of expression ‘capital asset’. The SLP against the aforesaid decision has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 108 Taxmann.com 339(2019). 8.2 On facts, the assessee in the instant case has not only been issued allotment letter, he has also made full payment to the authority concerned immediately thereafter. Thus, the asset is required to be held as long term capital asset even if the later date of payment is reckoned. Hence, the gains arising on sale of such asset h…

PCIT v. Vembu Vaidyanathan (108 Taxmann.com 339) — Cited in 13 Judgments | BharatTax