How many judgments cite Vinod Kumar Jain v. CIT?

31 judgments on BharatTax cite Vinod Kumar Jain v. CIT (344 ITR 501), spanning 2015 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 2(47), Section 142(1), Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(2).

Vinod Kumar Jain v. CIT

344 ITR 501High Court2012#3834 most cited

What is Vinod Kumar Jain v. CIT authority for?

The holding period of an asset, particularly a flat allotted by the DDA, commences from the date of the allotment letter, not the date of possession or subsequent sale deed registration.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vinod Kumar Jain v CIT · 344 ITR 501 · section 2(14) · section 2(42A) · section 2(29A) · holding period · allotment letter · date of transfer · capital gains · long term capital gain · DDA flats

Also reported as

195 Taxmann 174

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 142(1)Section 147 Section 148 Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 2(14)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(42a)period of holding long-term capital asset section 2(47)section 53 indexed cost of acquisition section 2(14)date of transfer section 54 cost of improvement section 48 short term capital gain

Judgments citing Vinod Kumar Jain v. CIT

Anshu Dhawan, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, NFAC

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4182/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmananshu Dhawan, Vs. Income Tax Officer, House No.933, Sector 17B, Delhi. Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Aggpd5365D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca Shri Ankur Agarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.11.2025 Date Of Order : 30.01.2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘A’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Anshu Dhawan, vs. Income Tax Officer, House No.933, Sector 17B, Delhi. Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (PAN : AGGPD5365D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA Shri Ankur Agarwal, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 10.11.2025 Date of Order : 30.01.2026 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals…

Pradeep Kumar Rochwani, Jodhpur vs. Circle (Intl Tax), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 567/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain, Adv. (throughFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR a

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 263

…the order of the CIT(A), who we find had rightly concluded that the date of acquisition of the property under consideration was to be reckoned from the date of the allotment letter i.e 03.12.1999, therefore, we uphold his order." e. Vinod Kumar Jain Vs CIT [344 ITR 501] (Punjab & Haryana High Court) In this judgement, the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that for flats allotted by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), the holding period should be counted from the date of allotment letter. The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) also issued a circular (No. 471, dated 15th October 1986), where it has clarifie…

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

…on issuance of an allotment letter. The payment of balance amount and delivery of possession are consequential acts that relate back to and arise from the rights conferred by the allotment letter upon the assessee. 12. In the case of Vinod Kumar Jain vs CIT 344 ITR 501 it was held by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court that conjoined reading of section 2(14), 2(29A) and 2(42A) clarifies that holding period of the assessee starts from the date of issuance of allotment letter. Since allottee gets title of the property on the issuance of allotment letter and payment of first installment is only a consequential act…

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

ITA 851/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 111ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)

…y on issuance of an allotment letter. The payment of balance amount and delivery of possession are consequential acts that relate back to and arise from the rights conferred by the allotment letter upon the assessee. 12. In the case of Vinod Kumar Jain vs CIT 344 ITR 501 it was held by Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court that conjoined reading of section 2(14), 2(29A) and 2(42A) clarifies that holding period of the assessee starts from the date of issuance of allotment letter. Since allottee gets title of the property on the issuance of allotment letter and payment of first installment is only a consequential act…

Mohammed Farhan Mohammed Yunus Attarwala, Mumbai vs. Ward 20(2)(1), NFAC Delhi, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6819/MUM/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, ARFor Respondent: 18.02.2025

Section 234Section 270A

…some right had been created in favour of the vendee/transferee, when the agreement to sell had been executed." 15.1. Similar issue had come up before the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Vinod Kumar Jain v. CIT in [2010] 195 Taxman 174/344 ITR 501 wherein assessee was allotted a flat on 27.02.1982 on instalments under residential scheme of Delhi Development Authority (DDA). The possession of the said flat was, however, given to the assessee on 15.05.1986 and the letter issued in that behalf indicated the flat number and called upon the assessee-allottee to deposit the balance amount. The a…

Indu Bala, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 60(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3869/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

…h Court in the case of CIT vs A Suresh Rao 223 Taxmann 228(Kar)  Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Mrs.Madhu Kaul v. CIT &Anr.[(2014) 363 ITR 54 (P&H)]  Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Vinod Kumar Jain v CIT &Ors. [(2012) 344 ITR 501 (P&H)]  Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Tata Services Limited [(1980) 122 ITR 594 (Bom).]  Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Principal CIT v. Vembu Vaidyanathan [(2019) 413 ITR 248 (Bom.)]  Hon’ble ITAT Bangalore, C Bench in the case of Sri Mahendrasingh Ramsingh Jadav Vs. ITO in ITA No. 32/Bang/2018 dated 16.03.2021 In…

Bhupinder Singh Julka, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-Int. Tax. 2(1)(2), Delhi

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

ITA 1807/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT(DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 234BSection 80T

…ifferent from the terms of allotment and construction by D.D.A. In that view of the matter, CIT appeals of the Tribunal correctly held that the assessee had acquired the property in question on 31st December, 2004 on which the allotment letter was issued. ii) 344 ITR 501 (P&H) Vinod Kumar Jain vs CIT (Pages 8 - 11 of JPB) 12. It would also be advantageous to refer to Circular No. 471, dated 15-10-1996 [162 ITR (St.) 41] issued by CBDT on which ITA No.-1807/Del/2022 Bhupinder Singh Julka heavy reliance has been placed by the assessee whereby instructions have been issued regarding treatment of capital gains tax in…

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

…54 is not allowed. The assessee replied on 05/12/2016. He stated that the purchase agreement is registered on 23/12/2011 and allotment letter is dated 20/07/2009. As per the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in Vinod Kumar Jain versus CIT-344 ITR 501 and CBDT Circular No. 471 dated 15/10/1986 the property sold by the assessee is a long term capital gain. The learned Assessing Officer found that the project of construction was commenced only on 12/12/2011; therefore, on 23/12/2011 the above property was not in existence. He also rejected the allotment letter issued by the builder. Accordingly,…

Chandrashekher Ramraj Singh, Mumbai vs. ITO, 23(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3133/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Blechandrashekher Ramraj Singh V. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(3) 22-A, House No.4 108, Matru Mandir Sherley Rajan Road, Bandra (W) Tardeo, Nana Chowk Mumbai – 400050 Grant Road, Mumbai – 400 007 Pan: Aanps7840R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwal & Shri Hemant Bahedia Department By : Shri R.A. Dhyani

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwal &For Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 54Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Chandrashekher Ramraj Singh v. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(3) 22-A, House No.4 108, Matru Mandir Sherley Rajan Road, Bandra (W) Tardeo, Nana Chowk Mumbai – 400050 Grant Road, Mumbai – 400 007 PAN: AANPS7840R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwal & Shri Hemant Bahedia Department by : Shri R.A. Dhyani Date of Hearing : 22.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 20.05.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by…

Shiv Kumar Jatia, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 10(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7256/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 7256/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 241/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Sh. Shiv Kumar Jatia, Vs Income Tax Officer, B-50, Gulmohar Park, Ward-10(2), New Delhi-110049 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabpj7582K Assessee By : Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Prakash Dubey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.04.2021

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 2(24)Section 71Section 74

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 7256/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 241/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Sh. Shiv Kumar Jatia, Vs Income Tax Officer, B-50, Gulmohar Park, Ward-10(2), New Delhi-110049 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABPJ7582K Assessee by : Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 10.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 26.04.2021 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:…

Shiv Kumar Jatia, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 10(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 241/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. C. S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 2(24)Section 71Section 74

K S Hanumantha Rao, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru-2, Bangalore

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

ITA 31/BANG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.K.S.Hanumantha Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh B.Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 54

…an allotment letter. The payment of balance amount and delivery of possession are consequential acts that relate back to and arise from the rights conferred by the allotment letter upon the assessee. 5.2.9 In the case of Vinod Kumar Jain v CIT & Ors. [(2012) 344 ITR 501 (P&H)] it was held by Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court that conjoined reading of section 2(14), 2(29A) and 12 Sri.K S Hanumantha Rao. 2(42A) clarifies that holding period of the assessee starts from the date of issuance of allotment letter. Since allottee gets title of the property on the issuance of allotment letter and payment of first insta…

Sri Mahendrasingh Ramsingh Jadav, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(5), Bengaluru

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

ITA 32/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Smt.Jinita Chaterjee, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.R.Premi, JCIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 54Section 54(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “C”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Shri B.R.Baskaran, AM ITA No.32/Bang/2018 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 Sri.Mahendrasingh Ramsingh The Income Tax Officer Jadav, I-104, 1,Brigade Metropolis Ward 5(3)(5) v. Whitefield Main Road Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 048. PAN : ACZPJ4415H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Smt.Jinita Chaterjee, Advocate Respondent by : Smt.R.Premi, JCIT-DR Date of Date of Hearing : 11.03.2021 Pronouncement : 16.03.2021 O R D E R Per George George K, JM : This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)’s…

L. Vivekananda, Mysore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1), Mysore

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

ITA 1087/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri G.N. Bhat, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R

…ITA No.1087/Bang/2018 Shri L. Vivekananda, Mysore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri L. Vivekananda M/s. Vivek Hotels, 1294/1-B ACIT J.L.B. Road Circle-1(1), Residency Road Vs. Mysuru-570 005 Nazarbad Mysuru-570 010 PAN NO : AASPV6693A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri G.N. Bhat, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. R. Premi, D.R. Date of Hearing : 17.11.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 18.11.2020 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee…

ACIT Circle-19(2), New Delhi vs. Lokvir Kapoor, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1964/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishilokvir Kapoor, Vs. Acit, C-8, Ground Floor, Pashimi Circle-19(2), Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Ajlpk0736H (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Lokvir Kapoor, Circle-19(2), C-8, Ground Floor, Pashimi New Delhi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Ajlpk0736H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Smt Deepali Chandra, CIT DR

Section 143Section 54FSection 56Section 56(2)(iii)Section 56(2)(vii)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―D‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Lokvir Kapoor, Vs. ACIT, C-8, Ground Floor, Pashimi Circle-19(2), Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AJLPK0736H (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT, Vs. Lokvir Kapoor, Circle-19(2), C-8, Ground Floor, Pashimi New Delhi Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi PAN: AJLPK0736H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Deepesh Jain, CA Revenue by: Smt Deepali Chandra, CIT DR Date of Hearing 22/08/2019 Date of pronouncement 20/11/2019 O R D E R PER PR…

Lokvir Kapoor, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-19(2), New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1532/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Smt Deepali Chandra, CIT DR

Section 143Section 54FSection 56Section 56(2)(iii)Section 56(2)(vii)

Triple Ess Infrastructure P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Range-27, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2444/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR and Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)

…d payment is only follow up action and the delivery of possession is only a mere formality. In support of his contention he relied upon the following case laws :- a. Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Vinod Kumar Jain v. CIT, Ludhiana (2012) 344 ITR 501 b. Ms. Madhu Kaul v. CIT (2014) 363 ITR 54 c. Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT v. K. Ramakrishnan (2014) 363 ITR 59 d. Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Jitendra Mohan (2007) 165 Taxman 524 (Delhi) e. Hon’ble Madra High Court in the case of CIT vs. S. R. Jeyashankar (2015) 373 ITR 120 (…

Jayati S. Chakraborty, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7122/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhjayati S Chakraborty Acit - 31(2) 1803/1804, B-Wing, Oberoi C-11, Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Woods, Mohan Gokhale Road, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Goregaon (E), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400063. Mumbai-400051. Pan: Aaopc5980B Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Aarati Visanji With Sh. Salin R. Divatia-(Ar) Respondent By : Shri Rajeev Gubgotra (Dr)

For Appellant: Shri Aarati Visanji with Sh. Salin R. Divatia-(AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 54

…efit of LTCG as well as indexed cost of consideration from 2008 itself. The ld. AR for the assessee also relied on the CBDT circular No. 672 dated 16th December 1993 and the decisions of Madhu Kaul v. CIT [2014] 363 ITR 54 (P&H), Vinod Kumar Jain v. CIT[2012] 344 ITR 501 (P&H), Anita D Kanjani v. ACIT 23(1), Mumbai (ITA No. 2291/Mum/2015), Sneha Bimal Parekh v Pr. CIT, Mumbai (ITA No. 5489/Mum/2015), ACIT v. Sanjay Kumath (ITA No. 448/Ind/2017) , Simi Khanna v. ACIT (ITA No. 2076/Mum/2017) & Nitin Prakash v. DCIT, Thane. ITA No. 7122 Mum 2016-Jayati S Chakraborty 9. On the other hand the ld. DR for the revenue…

Vijay Rangroo, Mumbai vs. ITO (It) 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3063/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Milind Bakhai (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajiv Gubgutra (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 54

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE, SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mr. Vijay Rangroo ITO (IT) 4(1)(1), C/o 761, Building No. 7, Air India Building, Solitaire Corporate Park, Vs. Nariman Point, Andheri East, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400093. PAN: AFYPR2330H Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Milind Bakhai (AR) Respondent by : Shri Rajiv Gubgutra (DR) Date of Hearing : 29.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 28.09.2018 ORDERUNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee under section 253…

ACIT - 21(1), Mumbai vs. Anoop Saxena, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2012-2013 is dismissed

ITA 5101/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhacit Circ-21 Shri Anup Saxena Room No. 116, 1St Floor, 507, Shah & Nahar Indl Estate, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Dr. E. Moses Road, Worli, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400018. Pan: Afops0804H Appellant Respondent Appellant By : R. Kavitha (Dr) Respondent By : Shri B.V. Jhaveri (Advocate) Date Of Hearing : 30.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2018 Orderunder Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: R. Kavitha (DR)For Respondent: Shri B.V. Jhaveri (Advocate)

Section 253Section 254(1)Section 45Section 54Section 54(1)(i)

…he case of CIT vs. Ramakrishnan, 48 taxmann.com 55(Den has held that the date of allotment is relevant for the purpose of computing holding period and not the date of conveyance deed. Similarly, the Hon'ble P&H High Court has held in Vinod Kumar Jain vs. CIT, 344 ITR 501 (P&H) that an allottee acquires a title of property on receiving allotment letter and payment of installment is only a consequential action upon which delivery of possession follows. Hence, in the light of the undisputed facts that the assessee had made payment of Rs. 1,25,00,000/- on 18.04.2011 from her share ITA No. 5101 Mum 2016-Shri Anup Sa…