Sterling Construction & Investments v. ACIT

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RAMESH RAVJI CHHEDA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are\ndismissed

…e assessee was the right to sue for\ndamages and the compensation was paid under the decree\ntowards the said right to sue.\n16. In another judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the\ncase of Sterling Construction Investment vs. ACIT reported in\n(2015) 374 ITR 474, wherein the decision of CIT vs. Vijay Flexi\nContainers have been considered at length by the Hon'ble High\nCourt. The facts in that case were that the assessee had entered\ninto an oral agreement with 'ECL' to purchase factory premises to\ngive it on lease and earn lease rent. At the time of finalizing the\nsale agreement, ECL backed out of sai…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MAHENDRA RAVJI CHHEDA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are\ndismissed

…assessee was the right to sue for\ndamages and the compensation was paid under the decree\ntowards the said right to sue.\n16.\nIn another judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the\ncase of Sterling Construction Investment vs. ACIT reported in\n(2015) 374 ITR 474, wherein the decision of CIT vs. Vijay Flexi\nContainers have been considered at length by the Hon'ble High\nCourt. The facts in that case were that the assessee had entered\ninto an oral agreement with 'ECL' to purchase factory premises to\ngive it on lease and earn lease rent. At the time of finalizing the\nsale agreement, ECL backed out of sai…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. RASIK KUNVERJI CHHEDA, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are\ndismissed

…e assessee was the right to sue for\ndamages and the compensation was paid under the decree\ntowards the said right to sue.\n16. In another judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the\ncase of Sterling Construction Investment vs. ACIT reported in\n(2015) 374 ITR 474, wherein the decision of CIT vs. Vijay Flexi\nContainers have been considered at length by the Hon'ble High\nCourt. The facts in that case were that the assessee had entered\ninto an oral agreement with 'ECL' to purchase factory premises to\ngive it on lease and earn lease rent. At the time of finalizing the\nsale agreement, ECL backed out of sai…

DCIT, MUM vs. SHELTER DEVELOPERS, MUM

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is\nallowed and Revenue's appeal is dismissed

…it was not the case of compensation on account of\nright to sue. The right to sue is a capital receipt and in support\nhe strongly relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay\nHigh Court in the case of Sterling Construction and\nInvestments vs. ACIT (2015) 374 ITR 474.\n26. Thus, the issue before us is, whether the compensation\nreceived by the assessee as per the consent term filed before the\nHon'ble Supreme Court can be brought to tax as revenue receipt\nor it is a capital receipt not chargeable to tax. As per Section 6 of\nTransfer of Property Act, right to sue cannot be transferred. If\nthe compensation o…

VIRENDRA BHAVANJI GALA,MUMBAI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL, MUMBAI-4, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

…to the assessee was the right to sue for damages and the compensation was paid under the decree towards the said right to sue. 16. In another judgment of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sterling Construction Investment vs. ACIT reported in (2015) 374 ITR 474, wherein the decision of CIT vs. Vijay Flexi Containers have been considered at length by the Hon‟ble High Court. The facts in that case were that the assessee had entered into an oral agreement with 'ECL' to purchase factory premises to give it on lease and earn lease rent. At the time of finalizing the sale agreement, ECL backed out of said ora…

EMVEE SHAH REAL ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EMVEE SHAH HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED) ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 8(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals being ITAs no

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…cree by the Revenue does not lead to the conclusion that the assessee had the right, title, or interest in the property, which was transferred to R A Realty for payment of Rs.135 crore. 16. We find that in Sterling Construction & Investments v/s ACIT, [2015] 374 ITR 474 (Bom.), inter alia, the following question of law came up for consideration before the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court:- “(ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the compensation received by the Appellant as per the Consent Terms dated 19.08.1994 was on account of relinquishment of the claim for specific performance and, theref…

PRATIBHA MAHENDRA SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 8(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals being ITAs no

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…cree by the Revenue does not lead to the conclusion that the assessee had the right, title, or interest in the property, which was transferred to R A Realty for payment of Rs.135 crore. 16. We find that in Sterling Construction & Investments v/s ACIT, [2015] 374 ITR 474 (Bom.), inter alia, the following question of law came up for consideration before the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court:- “(ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the compensation received by the Appellant as per the Consent Terms dated 19.08.1994 was on account of relinquishment of the claim for specific performance and, theref…

SHIRIN MAHENDRA SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals being ITAs no

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…cree by the Revenue does not lead to the conclusion that the assessee had the right, title, or interest in the property, which was transferred to R A Realty for payment of Rs.135 crore. 16. We find that in Sterling Construction & Investments v/s ACIT, [2015] 374 ITR 474 (Bom.), inter alia, the following question of law came up for consideration before the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court:- “(ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the compensation received by the Appellant as per the Consent Terms dated 19.08.1994 was on account of relinquishment of the claim for specific performance and, theref…

MAHENDRA CORPORATION ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals being ITAs no

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…cree by the Revenue does not lead to the conclusion that the assessee had the right, title, or interest in the property, which was transferred to R A Realty for payment of Rs.135 crore. 16. We find that in Sterling Construction & Investments v/s ACIT, [2015] 374 ITR 474 (Bom.), inter alia, the following question of law came up for consideration before the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court:- “(ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the compensation received by the Appellant as per the Consent Terms dated 19.08.1994 was on account of relinquishment of the claim for specific performance and, theref…

NUSRAT MUSTAFA RASIWALA,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 25, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am Nusrat Mustafa Rasiwala Pr. Commissioner Of 2/5, Ai Hasnat Chs Income Tax-25 Off S R Marg (West End) C-10, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Vs. North South Road, 10Th Road Bandra Kurla Complex Jvpd, Mumbai-400 049 (East), Mumbai Appellant .. Respondent Pan No.Aabpr1985J

…h Court in the case of CIT vs. Parmanand M Patel (278 ITR 3); Hon’ble Punjay & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Subhash Kumar Jain (335 ITR 364) and that of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sterling Construction and Investments vs. ACIT(Inv) (374 ITR 474). Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of Sterling Construction and Investments (supra) has held as under: - 19. As noticed earlier, the Assessing Officer or the appellate authority is required to be satisfied in the course of any proceedings before the authority as to whether penalty is imposable or not. What is the meaning of the terms 'satis…