How many judgments cite Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT?

159 judgments on BharatTax cite Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT (372 ITR 83), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 50C, Section 143(3), Section 50C(2), Section 147, Section 250, Section 144.

Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT

372 ITR 83High Court2015#618 most cited

What is Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer is duty-bound to refer the valuation of property to the Departmental Valuation Officer under Section 50C(2) when an assessee disputes the stamp duty valuation or if there is a discrepancy between the actual sale consideration and the guideline value. This reference is mandatory, even if not explicitly requested by the assessee, to ensure a realistic fair market value and avoid injustice.

159

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT · Section 50C · Section 50C(2) · DVO reference mandatory · Assessing Officer duty bound · stamp duty valuation dispute · guideline value difference · fair market value determination · capital gains Section 50C · valuation without assessee request

Also reported as

47 Taxmann.com 158225 Taxmann 211

Sections most often in play

Section 50C Section 143(3)Section 50C(2)Section 147 Section 250 Section 144 Section 148 Section 54EC

Issues it is cited on

section 50c(2)section 50c(1)section 50c section 142a section 50 section 43ca stamp duty value full value of consideration section 55 circle rate section 56(2)(x)fair market value

Judgments citing Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT

Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), Hyderabad vs. Rahmathunnisa Begum, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 239/HYD/2024[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.239/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Income Tax Officer Vs. Smt. Rahmathunnisa Ward 7(1) Begum, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Chfpb7761R (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devadas, Ca With Shri Shabbir Ali Khan (Assessee) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/05/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devadas, CA with Shri Shabbir Ali KhanFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT(DR)

Section 142ASection 250Section 251(1)Section 50(2)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

…learned AR submitted that the direction issued by the learned CIT (A) NFAC is in accordance with Page 3 of 6 ITA No 239 of 2024 Rahmathunnisa Begum law and he relied upon the decision of the Kolkata High Court in the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal reported in 372 ITR 83 and also in the case of Smt. P. Sugandha and the provision of section 50(2) of the I.T. Act. 8. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the material available on record. In fact, the assessee during the assessement proceedings had submitted a claim that the value adopted by the Assessing Officer on the basis of the St…

M/S Goyal Developrs, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Pune

ITA 210/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.210/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S.Goyal Developers, The Acit, 1, Business Embassy, V Circle-2, Pune. 1205/3/3, J.M.Road, S Shivajinagar, Pune – 411005. Pan: Aajfg5666P Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr Date Of Hearing 29/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 01/05/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2015-16 Dated 08.12.2023. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Not Appreciating That There Was Marginal Difference Between The Sales Consideration Shown By The Appellant & The Value Adopted For Payment Of Stamp Duty & M/S.Goyal Developers [A]

Section 1Section 16ASection 2Section 23ASection 24Section 250Section 34ASection 35Section 37Section 43

…nation of the value of the asset. In this case, admittedly assessee had disputed the valuation. The assessee had submitted comparative rates of the adjacent areas. 5.1 The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held in the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs. CIT [2015] 372 ITR 83 (Cal) as under : 4 M/s.Goyal Developers [A] “For the aforesaid reasons, we are of the opinion that the valuation by the Departmental Valuation Officer, contemplated under section 50C, is required to avoid miscarriage of justice. The Legislature did not intend that the capital gain should be fixed merely on the basis of the valuation to be made b…

Realtech Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 146/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 146/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Realtech Nirman Pvt. Ltd.,……………………..Appellant T-68, Tegharia Main Road, Post-Hatiara, Behind Lokenath Mandir, Kolkata-700059, West Bengal [Pan:Aadcr6464K] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,.….…Respondent Circle11(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri B.K. Singh, Jcit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 08, 2024 O R D E R

Section 115Section 15Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 56(2)(x)

…ITA No. 146/KOL/2024 (A.Y. 2020-2021) Realtech Nirman Pvt. Ltd. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 146/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Realtech Nirman Pvt. Ltd.,……………………..Appellant T-68, Tegharia main Road, Post-Hatiara, Behind Lokenath Mandir, Kolkata-700059, West Bengal [PAN:AADCR6464K] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,.….…Respondent Circle11(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances by: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the…

Suyog Development Corporation Limited, Pune, Maharashtra vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 820/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Mehta and Shri Sajjan TarunwarFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 43CSection 50C(2)

…” u/sec.43CA(3) and (4) nor the department has made a statutory reference to the DVO under sub-sec.(2) thereof to be read in light of sec.50C(2) of the Act made applicable mutatis mutandis herein by the legislature. Case law Sunil Kumar Agarwal vs. CIT [2015] 372 ITR 83 (Cal.) 3 I.T.A.No.820/PUN./2023 (HC) has settled the issue that such a reference ought to be mandatorily made even if the assessee concerned fails to make a prayer during the course of assessment. Faced with the situation, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance back to the learned Assessing Officer for…

Avinash Kumar, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1629/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Acit, Circle 2(1) Avinash Kumar Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Flat No.D/5, B Block, Shiv Kumar Asthali, Phase Ii, Nh-33 Road, Chowringhee Square, 7 Th Vs. Mango, Jamshedpur, Floor, Kolkata-700069 Jharkhand-831012 West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Bifpk4983A Assessee By : Shri Manoj Soni, Ar Revenue By : Shri Gaurav Kanaujia, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Soni, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Kanaujia, DR

Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 55Section 56(2)(x)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM ACIT, Circle 2(1) Avinash Kumar Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Flat No.d/5, B Block, Shiv Kumar Asthali, Phase II, NH-33 Road, Chowringhee Square, 7 th Vs. Mango, Jamshedpur, Floor, Kolkata-700069 Jharkhand-831012 West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. BIFPK4983A Assessee by : Shri Manoj Soni, AR Revenue by : Shri Gaurav Kanaujia, DR Date of hearing: 16.01.2025 Date of pronouncement : 31.01.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Dispute Res…

Devisetti Surya Jyothi, Gaiuwaka vs. ITO, Ward-52(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1164/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69

…referring the matter to the DVO the Ld. CIT (A) ought to have accepted the same. 5. For that reference ought to have been made to the DVO in view of the judicial pronouncement of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal vs. CIT (2016) 372 ITR 83 (CAL). 6. For that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in treating the Bank deposits as unexplained investment in the Bank A/cs. u/s 69 of the Act on alleged grounds. 7. For that the appellant having not maintained any books of accounts the addition so confirmed towards unexplained investments u/s 69 of the Act is bad-in-law. 8. For that the Ld. CIT (A) erre…

Rajdeep Sodhani, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-40(2), Kolkata.

ITA 756/KOL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘SMC’, KOLKATA [Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member & Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 756/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Rajdeep Sodhani vs ITO, Ward-40(2), Kolkata PAN: ALSPS 1830 M Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 04.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement 11.01.2024 For the Assessee Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate For the Revenue Shri Pravash Roy, Addl. CIT ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, JM: This appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2019-20 is directed against the order dated 08.06.2023 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax,…

Vijaykumar Ganpat Bhosle, Kandivali West, Mumbai vs. National E-Assessment Centre Delhi, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi

ITA 2403/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Vijaykumar Ganpat National E-Assessment Bhosle, Centre, Delhi B-I, 702, 7Th Floor, 401, 2Nd Floor, Blue Ocean, Vs. E-Ramp, Ekta Nagar, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Kandivali (W), Delhi – 110 003 Mumbai – 400 067 Pan: Aexpb4812Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Hakani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Singh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Vijaykumar Ganpat National E-Assessment Bhosle, Centre, Delhi B-I, 702, 7th Floor, 401, 2nd Floor, Blue Ocean, Vs. E-Ramp, Ekta Nagar, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Kandivali (W), Delhi – 110 003 Mumbai – 400 067 PAN: AEXPB4812Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Rahul Hakani, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Ajay Singh, D.R. Date of Hearing : 11 . 10 . 2023 Date of Pronouncement : 10 . 11 . 2023 O R D E R Per : Kuldip Singh,…

Rohit Jainendra Jain, Faridabad vs. ACIT CC-5, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8024/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 43CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2016-17 Shri Rohit Jainendra Jain, Vs. ACIT CC-5, 965, Sector-15, Faridabad, New Delhi. Haryana 121007. PAN AAMPJ3039N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Sanjay Jain, CA Department by: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 29.08.2023 Date of 27.10.2023 pronouncement: O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 07.08.2019 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 New Delhi (“CIT(A)”)…

Gautam Kumar HUF, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-29(3), Kolkata

ITA 232/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “सी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी संजय गग" "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 232/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Gautam Kumar HUF Vs. ITO, Ward-29(3), Kolkata (PAN: AADHG 8841 E) Appellant / (अपीलाथ") Respondent / (!"यथ") 17.05.2023 Date of Hearing / सुनवाई क% "त'थ Date of Pronouncement/ 25.07.2023 आदेश उ*घोषणा क% "त'थ For the Appellant/ Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate "नधा"0रती क% ओर से For the Respondent/ Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl…

Navinchandra Girdharbhai Patel, Surat vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 229/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.229/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Navinchandra Girdharbhai Patel Assistant Commissioner Of Income 23, Mitrali Row House, B/S Sahaj Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat Room Vs. Super Store, Surat-395009 No.301, Income Tax Office, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan- Hazira Road, Surat-395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adqpp 1133 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant ) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar– Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.229/SRT/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Navinchandra Girdharbhai Patel Assistant Commissioner of Income 23, Mitrali Row House, B/S Sahaj Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat Room Vs. Super Store, Surat-395009 No.301, Income Tax Office, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan- Hazira Road, Surat-395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ADQPP 1133 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant ) (""थ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Mehul Shah, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent by…

Smt.Shyamali Das, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Kolkata

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

ITA 211/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 50CSection 50C(2)

…ITA No. 211/KOL/2023 Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Smt. Shyamali Das IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 211/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Smt. Shyamali Das,................................Appellant 8A, Lake Road, Kolkata-700029 [PAN: ADEPD4524H] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-30, Kolkata, 2, Gariahat Road (South), Dhakuria, Kolkata-700068 Appearances by: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assesseee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. D.R…

Shri Prakash Sadashiv Sonawane, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Nashik

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 349/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 50C(1)

…s to attract sec.50C(1) first and second proviso. This is indeed coupled with the fact that both the lower authorities have also not sought the DVO’s report held as mandatory even in absence of the assessee’s request as per Sunil Kumar Agarwal, vs. CIT [2014] 372 ITR 83 (Kol.). We accordingly restore the assessee’s instant sole substantive ground back to the Assessing Officer to decide afresh as per sec.50C(1) first and second proviso r.w.s. 50C(2) of the Act preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly. 11 ITA.No.349/PUN./2023 7. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statisti…

Nirmal Santra, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(3), Kolkata

ITA 1/KOL/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 50C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'एसएमसी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री संजय गगग, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं डॉ. मनीष बोरड, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Nirmal Santra..…....................................................Appellant [PAN: AKOPS 6530 P] Vs. ITO, Ward-44(3) Kolkata.......................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. Somnath Ghosh, Adv., appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R, appeared on behal…

Macrotech Developers Ltd.(Successor to Bellissimo Crown Buildmart Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 2266/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 928Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM ITA Nos. 2266 & 2239/Mum/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Macrotech Developers Ltd. (MDL) DCIT-7(3), 412, Floor-4, 17G, Room No.655, 6th Floor, Vardhaman Chamber, Cawasji Patel Road, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAACL1490J Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta, AR Revenue by : Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT DR Date of hearing: 18.01.2023 Date of pronouncement : 17.04.2023 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM:…

Macrotech Developrs Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 2239/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 928Section 92B

Manohar Madanlal Paliwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 26(2)(1)/NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 51/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.51/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Manohar Madanlal Paliwal बिधम/ Ito-26(2)(1), C/204, Woodland Heights, Mumbai/Nfac Vs. Chandivali Farm Road, New Delhi. Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400072. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Calpp3259F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue By: Shri Anil Gupta सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/03/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Individual Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 28.11.2022 For Ay. 2018- 19. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.21,84,330/- U/S 56(2)(Vii)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Anil Gupta

Section 44ASection 56(2)(vii)

…jected the request of the Department to set aside the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for referring the case to the Valuation Officer. 6. Further, it is noted that Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, in the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs. CIT reported in 372 ITR 83 has held that the AO who is discharging quasi-judicial function, has the bounden duty to act fairly and to follow the course provided by law, which in that case, was the reference to the valuation officer. In that case, in view of the assessee’s objection and the claim before the AO that 6 A.Y. 2018-19 Manohar Madanlal Paliwal stamp circle rate/va…

M/S. Ravi Developments, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle -2, Mumbai

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

ITA 1932/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Ravi Developments V. Dcit – Central Circle – 2 76, Laxmi Palace Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor Mathuradas Road, Kandivali (W) Road No. 16Z Mumbai – 400067 Wagle Industrial Estate Thane, Mumbai - 400604 Pan: Aaafr2516G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Akshay Jain Department Represented By : Shri Ashish Kumar

Section 143(2)Section 43CSection 44A

…ty exceeds the fair market value of the property, then, Assessing Officer is duty bound to refer the valuation of the concerned asset to the valuation officer. For this proposition the appellant has relied on following decisions: a. Sunil Kumar Agarwal vs CIT 47 Taxmann.com 158 (Calcutta HC) b. Telmos Electronics vs ACIT 2017 (12) TMI 736- ITAT Delhi c) ITO vs Smt. Surekha Vilas Soudagar 2018 (6) TMI 1184-ITAT Mumbai (iv). Without prejudice to above, the appellant had opted for Income Disclosure Scheme, 2016 (IDS-2016) wherein an amount of Rs. 11,75,00,000/ was offered as business income and all the discrepancies…

Sarada Impex Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 13(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 611/KOL/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 50C

…restored to the file of the AO with the direction to assess the income after obtaining the valuation report from the DVO. In defense of his arguments relied on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Sunil Kumar Agarwal vs. CIT, Siliguri in 372 ITR 83 (Cal) wherein the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court held that before substituting the market value for the sale consideration, the AO is duty bound to refer the matter to the DVO. The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and appeal may be restored back to the file of AO to assess the income of the assessee after obtaini…

Sri Santhemathavathur Bhadregowda Shivalingaiah, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-7(2)(5), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 549/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, D.R

Section 234Section 56(2)(vii)

…ITA No.549/Bang/2019 Sri Santhemathavathur Bhadregowda Shivalingaiah, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sri Santhemathavathur Bhadregowda Shivalingaiah, #115/116, 1st Main, 4th Cross Magadi Road, HVR Layout Vs. ITO Ward-7(2)(5) Bangalore 560 079 Bangalore PAN NO : AKTPS9680H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, D.R. Date of Hearing : 06.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 08.02.2023 O R D E R PER LAXMI PR…