What is Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Extinguishment of rights in a capital asset includes transfer and attracts capital gains computation provisions. Demolition and conversion of a building into scrap constitutes a form of transfer.

How many judgments cite Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT?

38 judgments on BharatTax cite Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647), spanning 2009 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 2(47), Section 35D, Section 40(a)(i), Section 80-O, Section 14A.

Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647)

YERRAGUDI VENKATA SIVA REDDY,ANANTAPUR vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

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

ITA 1294/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1294/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Yerragudi Venkata Siva Reddy, Ananthapur The Acit, Vs. Pin – 515 001. Circle-1, Pan Aampy0365L Kurnool. Andhra Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: -None- राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20.02.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

Section 2(47)(ii)Section 48

…)(ii). "Section 2(47)(ii) in The Income Tax Act, 1961 The "transfer", in relation to a capital asset, includes, the extinguishment of any rights therein" This interpretation has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Vania Silk Mills (P) Ltd. (191 ITR 647) and by the ITAT Ahmedabad in Shri Kiritkumar Kantilal Shroff v. DCIT, where 4 ITA.No.1294/Hyd./2025 it was held that demolition and conversion of the building into scrap is a form of transfer attracting the computation provisions of Section 48. 4. Substance over form in capital gains computation The approach adopted by the Learned CIT(A), relyi…

M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASING CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms

C.A. No.-000152-000152 - 2026Supreme Court09 Jan 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 47

…ock-in-trade by way of sale or exchange, so as to give rise to taxable business income. 4.3. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that the authorities relied upon by the High Court were distinguishable from the present case. In Orient Trading, 8 (1991) 191 ITR 647 (SC) 9 (1967) 66 ITR 692 (SC) 9 the assessee had exchanged shares of one existing company for shares of another; that case did not involve amalgamation or dissolution of the company whose shares were exchanged. Likewise, the English decision in Royal Insurance Co. Ltd v. Stephen10 dealt with realisation of investments, not stock- in-tra…

BAJAJ HOLDNGS & INVESTMENT LTD ( ERSTWHILE BAJAJ AUTO LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3043/MUM/2010[2002-013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2002-013

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhbajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. Of Income-Tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-3(4) Vs. M/S Bajaj Holding & Room No. 481-2, 4Th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd) Mumbai – 400020 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Percy Pardiwala & Vasanti Patel Respondent By : Ankush Kapoor

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)

…ecurities other than by way of transfer and is not be covered within the definition of transfer as per section 2(47). In support of the above contentions, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vania Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647) (SC). 66. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 67. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the record that the issue involved in this ground of appeal is similar to the grounds of appeal raised in Ground No. (K). However, the surplus received on redemption of treasury bil…

ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ AUTO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2899/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhbajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. Of Income-Tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-3(4) Vs. M/S Bajaj Holding & Room No. 481-2, 4Th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd) Mumbai – 400020 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Percy Pardiwala & Vasanti Patel Respondent By : Ankush Kapoor

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)

…ecurities other than by way of transfer and is not be covered within the definition of transfer as per section 2(47). In support of the above contentions, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vania Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647) (SC). 66. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 67. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the record that the issue involved in this ground of appeal is similar to the grounds of appeal raised in Ground No. (K). However, the surplus received on redemption of treasury bil…

DCIT RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

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

ITA 4372/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Bajaj Auto Limited V. Dcit – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Range – 3(1) V. M/S. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6Th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar Department Represented By : Shri Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(4)(b)Section 234Section 35Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 40

…ecurities other than by way of transfer and is not be covered within the definition of transfer as per section 2(47). In support of the above contentions, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vania Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647) (SC). 66. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 67. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the record that the issue involved in this ground of appeal is similar to the grounds of appeal raised in Ground No. (K). However, the surplus received on redemption of treasury bil…

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 4236/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Bajaj Auto Limited V. Dcit – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Range – 3(1) V. M/S. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6Th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar Department Represented By : Shri Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(4)(b)Section 234Section 35Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 40

…ecurities other than by way of transfer and is not be covered within the definition of transfer as per section 2(47). In support of the above contentions, he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vania Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647) (SC). 66. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 67. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the record that the issue involved in this ground of appeal is similar to the grounds of appeal raised in Ground No. (K). However, the surplus received on redemption of treasury bil…

DCIT CIR - 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 573/MUM/2007[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ns’. The assessee claimed that the amount was not liable to tax on the ground that redemption does not amounting to transfer, resulting in capital gain after relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vaniya Silk Mils Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 191 ITR 647. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee, after referring the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Grace Collins v/s CIT [248 ITR 323] wherein held that extinguishment of the assets P a g e | 4 ITA No. 2125 & 1399/Mum/2005 & ITA No. 3055 & 2655/Mum/2005 A.Y. 1999-2000 & 2000 -2001 Bajaj Auto Limited it…

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3055/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ns’. The assessee claimed that the amount was not liable to tax on the ground that redemption does not amounting to transfer, resulting in capital gain after relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vaniya Silk Mils Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 191 ITR 647. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee, after referring the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Grace Collins v/s CIT [248 ITR 323] wherein held that extinguishment of the assets P a g e | 4 ITA No. 2125 & 1399/Mum/2005 & ITA No. 3055 & 2655/Mum/2005 A.Y. 1999-2000 & 2000 -2001 Bajaj Auto Limited it…

THE DCIT 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2655/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 2000-2001

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ns’. The assessee claimed that the amount was not liable to tax on the ground that redemption does not amounting to transfer, resulting in capital gain after relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vaniya Silk Mils Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 191 ITR 647. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee, after referring the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Grace Collins v/s CIT [248 ITR 323] wherein held that extinguishment of the assets P a g e | 4 ITA No. 2125 & 1399/Mum/2005 & ITA No. 3055 & 2655/Mum/2005 A.Y. 1999-2000 & 2000 -2001 Bajaj Auto Limited it…

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2125/MUM/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ns’. The assessee claimed that the amount was not liable to tax on the ground that redemption does not amounting to transfer, resulting in capital gain after relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vaniya Silk Mils Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 191 ITR 647. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee, after referring the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Grace Collins v/s CIT [248 ITR 323] wherein held that extinguishment of the assets P a g e | 4 ITA No. 2125 & 1399/Mum/2005 & ITA No. 3055 & 2655/Mum/2005 A.Y. 1999-2000 & 2000 -2001 Bajaj Auto Limited it…

THE DY CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assesse are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1933/MUM/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri CharuFor Respondent: Shri. Krishna Bandi

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ns’. The assessee claimed that the amount was not liable to tax on the ground that redemption does not amounting to transfer, resulting in capital gain after relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vaniya Silk Mils Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 191 ITR 647. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee, after referring the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Grace Collins v/s CIT [248 ITR 323] wherein held that extinguishment of the assets P a g e | 4 ITA No. 2125 & 1399/Mum/2005 & ITA No. 3055 & 2655/Mum/2005 A.Y. 1999-2000 & 2000 -2001 Bajaj Auto Limited it…

M/S FLAMINGO HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GANDHIDHAM., GANDHIDHAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed with the above directions

ITA 64/RJT/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms.Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year : 2010-11 M/S.Flamingo Hotels P.Ltd. Ito, Ward-1 Plot No.416 Gandhidham. Ward-2B Adipur-Kutch.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, ld.CIT-DR

Section 2(47)Section 250(6)Section 45

…ra) was rendered in different set of facts and had not dealt on the issue of extinguishment of rights in assets particularly on destruction. Hon’ble Madras High Court held that therefore the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vania Silk Mills Vs. CIT, 1991] 191 ITR 647, which specifically dealt with the aspect of extinguishment of right in a destroyed asset holding that there was no transfer on destruction of asset, would still hold good. The ld.CIT(A) accordingly held that there was no transfer of building in year of destruction i.e. in 2001. However, on the aspect of transfer taking place in terms of sectio…

SUNBEAM MONOCHEM P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 8(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 524/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Ita No. 524 & 525/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2017-18 Sunbeam Monochem (P) Ltd., Acit, Circle-8(2)(2), 201/B Runwal & Omkar E- Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Square, Opp. Sion Chunabhatti Mumbai-400020. Singnal, Eastern Express Highway, Sion (E) Mumbai-400 002. Pan No. Aabcs 8172 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Mayur Makadia, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Paresh Deshpande, Dr : Date Of Hearing 24/04/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 27/04/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Mayur Makadia, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Paresh Deshpande, DR

Section 263

…ht to our notice that, the Hon’ble Supreme C brought to our notice that, the Hon’ble Supreme C brought to our notice that, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Sunbeam Monochem (P) Ltd. Sunbeam Monochem (P) Ltd. ITA No. case of Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647) had case of Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647) had case of Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647) had earlier held that the destruction of right on account of the earlier held that the destruction of right on account of the earlier held that the destruction of right on account of the destruction of an asset cannot be equate…

ACIT (LTU-1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ HOLDINGS & INVESTMENT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5030/MUM/2001[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2023AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleacit (Ltu-1) V. Bajaj Holdings Investment Ltd 29Th, Floor, Centre-1 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor World Trade Centre Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai- 400021 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400075 Pan: Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 96/Mum/2002 [Arising Out Of Ita No.5030/Mum/2001 (A.Y: 1997-98)] Bhajaj Auto Limited V. Acit (Ltu-1) Bhajaj Bhavan 29Th, Floor, Centre-1 Nariman Point World Trade Centre Mumbai - 400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400075 Pan: Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Percy Pardiwala& Ms. Vasanti Patel Department Represented By : Shri Rahul Kumar & Shri Vranda U Matkarri

Section 2(24)Section 35DSection 37(2)Section 80H

…of income the assessee has claimed that the amount is not liable to tax on the ground that redemption does not amount to transfer resulting in capital gains, relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vania silk Mills P. Ltd., v. CIT [191 ITR 647]. The Assessing Officer rejected the contention of the assessee and by relying on the decision of Page No.| 45 C.O.No. 96/MUM/2002 Bajaj Holdings Investment Ltd the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anarkali Sarabhai v. CIT [228 ITR 222] followed in Karthakaya Sarathai v. CIT [228 ITR 163]. 63. Before the Ld.CIT(A) assessee has fairly accepte…

SUNBEAM MONOCHEM P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT (A)-8, MUMBAI

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

ITA 624/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.624/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16) Sunbeam Monochem Pvt. बिधम/ Pcit-8 Ltd. Room No. 611, 6Th Floor, Vs. 201/B, Runwal & Omkar Aayakar Bhavan, Esquare, Opp Sion Maharshi Karve Road, Chunabhatti Signal, Eastern Mumbai-400020. Express Highway, Sion East, Mumbai-400022. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcs8172P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Devendra Jain Revenue By: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 10/03/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-8 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Pcit”], Mumbai Dated 26.02.2021 For Assessment Year 2015- 16 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri Devendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(vii)

…. PCIT on Section 45(1A) of the Act was misplaced and distinguishable in the given facts of the present case. Taking us through the legislative history, he brought to our notice that, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647) had earlier held that the destruction of right on account of the destruction of an asset cannot be equated with the extinguishment of the right on account of its ‘transfer’ and that therefore, the receipt of insurance proceeds was held to be in the nature of capital receipt not liable to tax. In order to overcome the decision in Vania Silk Mills…

ACIT CENT .CIR6(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. KENNETH BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2396/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhthe Asstt. Commissioner Vs. Kenneth Builders & Of Income Tax, Cc-6(4) Developers Limited Room No. 1925, 19Th 15Th Floor, Tower – 1, Floor, Air India Building, Indiabulls Finance Center Nariman Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai- 400021 Elphistone, Mumbai - 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacck8268P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Rakesh RanjanFor Respondent: K. Gopal & Om Kandalkar

Section 115JSection 143(2)

…also submitted that for profit or gain from the receipt, it must have originated by virtue of transfer within the meaning of section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. For this, the appellant has relied upon the decision of CIT vs. Vania Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. 191 ITR 647(SC). Further, the appellant has relied upon section 56 of the Indian Contract Act and submitted that the appellant had taken all the necessary steps to commence construction activity on the project but the DDA found it impossible of performance as per the development agreement. Therefore, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and the Supreme Court has…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2), CHENNAI vs. RUDRADEV AVIATION PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 2100/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meenaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2100/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2012 – 13 The Acit, M/S. Rudradev Aviation Pvt. Corporate Circle – 5(2), V. Ltd., Chennai - 34. Rr Tower Iii, Thiru Vi Ka Indl. Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. Pan: Aadcr 3575R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & C.O. No.: 152/Chny/2017 (In I.T.A. No. 2100/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012 – 13 M/S. Rudradev Aviation Pvt. The Acit, Ltd., V. Corporate Circle – 5(2), Rr Tower Iii, Chennai - 34. Thiru Vi Ka Indl. Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. Pan: Aadcr 3575R राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Cit "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri R. Venkatesh, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkatesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 28Section 37(1)

…other head of income. The ld.CIT-DR relied on the decisions of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs R. Chidambaranatha Mudaliar, (1990) 240 ITR 552 (Mad), Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vania Silk Mills (P) Ltd., (1991) 191 ITR 647(SC) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Sterling Investment Corporation, 123 ITR 441 (Bom). He also relied on the judgments cited by the AO in the assessment order of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Kwality Fun Foods and Restaurants (P) Ltd., supra. He argued that even Hon’ble Supreme Court in Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Lt…

M/S. S P R DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 297/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri L Bharath, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)

Section 153A

…g into stock-in-trade proportionately into the previous years in which the constructed property was sold by the assessee or retained for self-use and corresponding business income was offered .-Vania Silk Mills (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1991) 98 CTR (SC) 153 : (1991) 191 ITR 647 (SC),Ghanshyamdas Kishan Chander vs. CIT (1980) 121 ITR 121 (AP), Alapati Venkataramiah vs. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 185 (SC), Octavius Steel & Co. Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2003) 78 TTJ 170 (Kol)(SB) : (2002) 83 ITD 87 (Kol)(SB) and Dy. CIT vs. Crest Hotels Ltd. (2002) 75 TTJ (Mumbai) 771 : (2001) 78 ITD 213 (Mumbai) relied on.” ITA No.295, 296 & 297/Bang/…

M/S. S P R DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 296/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri L Bharath, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)

Section 153A

…g into stock-in-trade proportionately into the previous years in which the constructed property was sold by the assessee or retained for self-use and corresponding business income was offered .-Vania Silk Mills (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1991) 98 CTR (SC) 153 : (1991) 191 ITR 647 (SC),Ghanshyamdas Kishan Chander vs. CIT (1980) 121 ITR 121 (AP), Alapati Venkataramiah vs. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 185 (SC), Octavius Steel & Co. Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2003) 78 TTJ 170 (Kol)(SB) : (2002) 83 ITD 87 (Kol)(SB) and Dy. CIT vs. Crest Hotels Ltd. (2002) 75 TTJ (Mumbai) 771 : (2001) 78 ITD 213 (Mumbai) relied on.” ITA No.295, 296 & 297/Bang/…

M/S. S P R DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 295/BANG/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri L Bharath, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)

Section 153A

…g into stock-in-trade proportionately into the previous years in which the constructed property was sold by the assessee or retained for self-use and corresponding business income was offered .-Vania Silk Mills (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1991) 98 CTR (SC) 153 : (1991) 191 ITR 647 (SC),Ghanshyamdas Kishan Chander vs. CIT (1980) 121 ITR 121 (AP), Alapati Venkataramiah vs. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 185 (SC), Octavius Steel & Co. Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2003) 78 TTJ 170 (Kol)(SB) : (2002) 83 ITD 87 (Kol)(SB) and Dy. CIT vs. Crest Hotels Ltd. (2002) 75 TTJ (Mumbai) 771 : (2001) 78 ITD 213 (Mumbai) relied on.” ITA No.295, 296 & 297/Bang/…

Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

What is Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

YERRAGUDI VENKATA SIVA REDDY,ANANTAPUR vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASING CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

BAJAJ HOLDNGS & INVESTMENT LTD ( ERSTWHILE BAJAJ AUTO LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

ADDL CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ AUTO LTD, MUMBAI

DCIT RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI

DCIT CIR - 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

THE DCIT 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DY CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI

THE DY CIT RG 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD, MUMBAI

M/S FLAMINGO HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GANDHIDHAM., GANDHIDHAM

SUNBEAM MONOCHEM P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 8(2)(2), MUMBAI

ACIT (LTU-1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ HOLDINGS & INVESTMENT LTD, MUMBAI

SUNBEAM MONOCHEM P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT (A)-8, MUMBAI

ACIT CENT .CIR6(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. KENNETH BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS LTD, MUMBAI

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2), CHENNAI vs. RUDRADEV AVIATION PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

M/S. S P R DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

M/S. S P R DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE

M/S. S P R DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE