Satya Dev Sharma v. ITO

149 ITD 725Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2014#18569 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Also reported as

58 SOT 139

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 54Section 54F

Issues it is cited on

section 147

Judgments citing Satya Dev Sharma v. ITO

MAHABIR,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 2(5), GURGAON

ITA 879/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITAs No.879 & 2597/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mahabir, Vs ITO, C/o M/s RRATAXINDIA, Ward-2(5), D-28, South Extension Part-I, Gurgaon. New Delhi– 110 049. PAN: CDKPM1226K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate & Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Revenue by : Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 15.10.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: These are appeals preferred by the assessee agains…

MAHABIR,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD- 2(5), GURGAON

ITA 2597/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITAs No.879 & 2597/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mahabir, Vs ITO, C/o M/s RRATAXINDIA, Ward-2(5), D-28, South Extension Part-I, Gurgaon. New Delhi– 110 049. PAN: CDKPM1226K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate & Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Revenue by : Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 15.10.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: These are appeals preferred by the assessee agains…

NARAYAN,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD 3(1), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 268/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Narayan Vs. Ito House No.431/9, Balaji Ward- 3 (1) Hanuman Mandir, Sector- Gurgaon 11, Shivaji Nagar, Gurgaon, Haryana – 122001 Pan No.Aqppn9087M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Yogesh Yadav, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Anshul, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 03/06/2024 Order Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm:

Section 147Section 148Section 2

…1-1994 and no change has been made in this notification after publication. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also submitted that this is a covered matter by the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of Subha Tripathi (Smt.) (Dr.) v. DCIT (2013) 58 SOT 139 (Jaipur) (Trib.) has held as under :- “Capital asset – Agricultural land- Municipal limit- Date of notification is relevant for assessing capital gains. Agricultural land, though located beyond 8 kms from municipal limits of Jaipur municipality as on date of impugned CBDT notification No.9447 dated 6-1-1994, but subsequently fell within the dist…

SHRI NEEL NARENDRA PATEL,,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(3),, VADODARA

ITA 1572/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Amarjit Singhay: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 143Section 147

…did not include Padra municipality in the list of municipal boards for the purpose of section 2(14)(iii)(b). 3.4 The Ld. authorised representative placed reliance on an order of ITAT Jaipur bench in the case of Satya Dev Sharma versus ITO reported in (2014) 149 ITD 725 (Jaipur Tribunal) for the proposition that where the assessing officer rejects the assessee’s explanation that the land in question was agricultural land and where the assessing officer proposes to bring capital gain arising from sale of land to tax, for the purpose of application of item (b) of sub clause (iii) of subsection 2 (14) and for the…

SHRI VISHAL NAREDRABHAI PATEL,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(2),, VADODARA

ITA 1571/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Amarjit Singhay: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 143Section 147

…did not include Padra municipality in the list of municipal boards for the purpose of section 2(14)(iii)(b). 3.4 The Ld. authorised representative placed reliance on an order of ITAT Jaipur bench in the case of Satya Dev Sharma versus ITO reported in (2014) 149 ITD 725 (Jaipur Tribunal) for the proposition that where the assessing officer rejects the assessee’s explanation that the land in question was agricultural land and where the assessing officer proposes to bring capital gain arising from sale of land to tax, for the purpose of application of item (b) of sub clause (iii) of subsection 2 (14) and for the…

Satya Dev Sharma v. ITO (149 ITD 725) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax