“Section 45(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 45Section 45(3)45 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 45(3) is CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty (128 ITR 294), cited in 628 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 45(3)

CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty

128 ITR 294 · 1981 · Supreme Court

628

citing judgments

When the cost of acquisition of a capital asset cannot be determined, the computation mechanism for capital gains fails, and thus no capital gains can be charged. This establishes a broader principle that a charging section cannot operate in the absence of specific machinery provisions for computation.

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)

315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court

363

citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

Rama Bai v. CIT

181 ITR 400 · 1990 · Supreme Court

258

citing judgments

Interest income is taxable on either an accrual or cash basis, determined by accounting principles. This method was applicable prior to legislative changes that simplified the taxation of interest income.

CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini

398 ITR 531 · 2017 · Supreme Court

228

citing judgments

A transfer of immovable property, for the purpose of capital gains under section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act, occurs only when the agreement allowing possession in part performance of a contract is a registered instrument, as mandated by Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.

CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya

91 Taxmann.com 20 · 2018 · Supreme Court

205

citing judgments

Interest on enhanced compensation received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the compensation, not merely interest income, and is exigible to tax on a receipt basis.

CIT v. Sohana Woollen Mills

296 ITR 238 · 2008 · High Court

180

citing judgments

A mere audit objection, by itself, is insufficient to infer that an Assessing Officer's order is erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue for the purpose of initiating revisional proceedings.

Mahender Pal Narang v. CBDT

161 Taxmann.com 301 · 2024 · High Court

178

citing judgments

Interest received as enhanced compensation under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for compulsory acquisition of land is taxable as "income from other sources" under Sections 56(2)(viii) and 57(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and is not exempt under Section 10(37).

CIT v. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages P Ltd.

331 ITR 192 · 2011 · High Court

152

citing judgments

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax cannot exercise revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer has taken one of two possible views on a debatable issue during assessment proceedings.

Judgments citing Section 45(3)

The Dy CIT 1(1), Indore vs. M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Indore

In the result, All the four appeals of the revenue and one cross appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 62/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 263

ITANo.86/Ind/2023 & others M.P. Paschim Keshetra Vidyut Vitran Co. Ltd. No. 1902/MPERC/2009. In exercise of powers conferred by Section 181 read with Section 45(3)(b) and 46 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and all powers enabling it in that behalf, the Madhya Pradesit Electricity Regulatory Commission hereby revises the Madhya

The Dy CIT1 (1), Indore vs. M/S M.P. Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Indore

In the result, All the four appeals of the revenue and one cross appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 61/IND/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 263

M.P.Pashchim Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Co Ltd, Indore vs. The Dy CIT 1(1), Indore

In the result, All the four appeals of the revenue and one cross appeal of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 108/IND/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 263

ITO, International Taxation Ward1(2), Chennai vs. Rajamanickam Arulselvan, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 479/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.479/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & C.O. No. 44/Chny/2023 [In I.T.A. No. 479/Chny/2023] The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri Rajamanickam Arulselvan, 65, Defence Officer Colony, 2Nd International Taxation Ward 1(2), Bsnl Building Tower-1, 4Th Floor, Avenue, 6Th Cross Street, Guindy, Greams Road, Thousand Light, Guindy Industrial Estate S.O., Chennai 600 006. Chennai 600 032. [Pan:Aappa2346C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01.04.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Manjunatha, G.: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai, Dated 22.02.2023 Passed In Ita No. 10039/Cit(A)-16/2012-2013 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds: 1. That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erroneous On The Facts, The Merits Of The Case & Provisions Of Law As Well & Hence Unsustainable. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Failing To Appreciate That When The Assessee Had Applied For Conversion Of The Vacant Land Into A Plotted

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 45(3)

which, the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment of capital gains derived from transfer of capital assets in terms of section 45(3) of the Act. Therefore, notice under section 148 of the Act dated 28.03.2018 was issued and duly served on the assessee. In response to 148 notice ... Since the transfer of asset by a partner into partnership firm vis-a-vis is a transfer as defined under section 45(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to file necessary evidence and to explain as to why capital gain tax should not be charged

DCIT-41(4)(1), Mumbai vs. Abdulsattar Suleman Ghaswala, Mumbai

In the result appeal of learned Assessing officer for A

ITA 1658/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Abdulsattar Suleman Dcit-41(4)(1) Ghaswala Room No. 425, 4Th Floor, Kautilya 142/48 Ghaswala Estate Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra(East) Vs. S V Road Jogeshwari(W) Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400102 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpg9088R Co No. 83/Mum/2023 (Arising In Ita No. 1658/Mum/2023 For A.Y. 2013-14) Abdulsattar Suleman Ghaswala Dcit-41(4)(1) Room No. 425, 4Th Floor, Kautilya 142/48 Ghaswala Estate S V Road Jogeshwari(W) Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra(East) Vs. Mumbai-400051 Mumbai-400102 (Cross Objector/ Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalpg9088R

For Appellant: Shri. K. ShivramFor Respondent: Shri. Ajay Chandran, DR

Section 143(3)Section 148

also found that the capital gain is chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee under Section 45(3) of the Act. On perusal of the return of the assessee, the learned Assessing Officer found that the assessee has not offered any capital gains and therefore, the reasons were ... learned Assessing Officer considered the above transfer as long-term capital gain chargeable to tax in the hands of the assessee under Section 45(3) of the Act amounting to ₹13,96,40,040/- ITA No.1658/Mum/2023, CO No. 83/Mum/2023 Abdulsattar Suleman Ghaswala; A.Y. 13-14 and passed the assessment order

Shri Babubhai Naranbhai Sakhiya, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Pr. Commr. of Income Tax-1, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 144/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 45(3)Section 54B

assessee had transferred capital asset which is an agriculture land situated Survey No.71/2, Kangashiyali which resulted in capital gain within the scope of section 45(3) of the Act. As per the working I.T.A No. 144/Rjt/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 3 Shri Babubhai Naranbhai Sakhiya. Vs. PCIT given

Bhavesh Shantilal Gohil, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-35(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 175/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalbhavesh Shantilal Gohil A-1304, Gohil Mansion, Irani Wadi, Shantilal Mody X Road No. 2, Asian Bakary Kandivali (West), Mumbai-400067 Pan: Abkpg2287Q ...... Appellant Vs. Ito – 35(1)(2) R. No. 2, C-12, Pratayaksha Kar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai-400051 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Ld. DR

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 50C

could not be applied to sale development rights of land owned by the assessee. We noted that the provisions of section 45(3) provides that when a person transfer his capital asset to a firm or a body of individual or to AOP by way of capital contribution for becoming ... account thereby the full value of consideration for the purpose of section 48 of the Act. We noted that the provisions of section 45(3) of the Act is a charging provision having two limbs joined by conjunction "AND". The first limb is a charging provision which levies capital gain

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur vs. Shri Sharad Goel, Raipur

In the result appeal of the revenue stands dismissed, in terms of our observations herein above

ITA 93/RPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 250(4)Section 45(3)

made by the AO on account of excess value of land treating as unexplained capital gain thereby completely ignoring the provisions as per section 45(3) of the IT act, 1961?" 2. "Whether on points of law and on facts & circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) was justified ... agricultural land and that the income arising from its sole was not exempt from the Capital Gain Tax. Further, as per section 45(3) of the income tax act, 1961 "The profit and gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset by a person to a firm in which

Smt Hafiz Shaikh, Dewas vs. The ITO Ward-1, Dewas

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

ITA 56/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanihafiz Shaikh Ito Ward-1 32/2, Laxmi Park Moti Dewas Vs. Bunglow Dewas (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Ajups6986 L Assessee By Ms. Richa Parwal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2023

Section 45Section 45(3)Section 54Section 54B

denied the claim of deduction on the ground that since the transfer in the case falls in ambit of section 45(3) of the Act and therefore, the claim of exemption/deduction u/s 54B is not allowable. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before ... assessee has submitted that the AO has committed an error in denying the deduction u/s 54B while making reference to section 45(3) of the Act. Ld. AR has submitted that the provision of section 45(3) contemplates deemed consideration in case Page 2 of 6 Hafiz Shaikh Page 3

Smt. Lilaben Babubhai Sakhiya, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Pr. Commr. of Income Tax-1, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 157/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT-D.R

Section 263Section 45(3)Section 54B

I.T.A No. 157/Rjt/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 3 Smt. Lilaben Babubhai Sakhiya vs. Pr. CIT village Vavdi resulting in capital gains under section 45(3) of the Act. As per the working given by the assessee in the statement of total income, the land was acquired

Kalubhai Dulabhai Golaviya, Surat vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Surat

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 619/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A No.15 & Ita No.619/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 &2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Kalubhai Dulabhai Golaviya Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, B/1-2, Jalaram Society, B/H. Central Circle-2, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Gurunagar Society, Varachha Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Road, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp 5116 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwin K Parekh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B.Koli, CIT-DR &

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 45(3)Section 54F

which is reproduced below: “The assessee has transferred block No,.201 of Mota Varachha in a firm Gangotri Enterprise. As per the provisions section 45(3) of the Act, the consideration recorded in the books of account of the firm is the capital receipt in the case of partner ... Partnership Deed is enclosed. (vide paper book Page 23 to 39). We note that this transfer is squarely covered by the provisions of section 45(3) of the Act. After that, assessee has sold his remaining land. Therefore, Capital Gain from both the transactions cannot be covered as business income

Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1), Bathinda vs. M/S Apex Fibre India Limited, Bathinda

ITA 84/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar23 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 145(3)Section 43(5)Section 45(3)

holding that the transactions under took by the assessee are not speculative in nature disregarding the definition of speculative transaction provided by section 45(3) of the Act. (iii) The CIT(A) erred in holding that the interest earned had an immediate nexus with the business of the assessee without ... nature disregarding the definition of transfer of the commodity or scripts. speculative transaction provided by Facts relating to transactions of edible oil section 45(3) of the Act. [Section during High Seas 43(5) as the section has been mentioned wrongly.] (Relevant documents filed in Paper book-2 pages

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bathinda vs. M/S G.H. Crop Science Private Limited, Bathinda

ITA 56/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar23 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 145(3)Section 43(5)Section 45(3)

G.Prasanna Venkatesan, Coimbatore vs. ITO Non Corp. Ward 2(4), Coimbatore

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

ITA 1973/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 45(3)Section 45(5)Section 68

full value of consideration being the amount recorded in the books of the firm M/s. GG Jewellery by applying the provisions of section 45(3) and not 45(5) of the Act. The CIT(A) observed in para 5.3 as under:- “5.3 I am of the opinion that the provisions ... section 45(3) shall apply to the case and the additions ought to have been made under the head Capital gains u/s.45(3) and not u/s.68. Thus the order of the AO requires modification in this regard. AO is directed to assess the capital gains by taking Rs.1

Dnyanshwar Nivruti Talpade, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax PCIT, Thane

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

ITA 1862/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudharydhyaneshwar Nivrutti Vs. Principal Commissioner Talapade, Plot No. 207, Of Income Tax, 6 Th Floor, Nirmal Nagar At Post Ashar I.T. Park, Road Asangaon, Shahpur, Number 162 Nehru Nagar Shahpur Maharashtra - Wagle Ind. Estate, 421601 Thane (W) 400604 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Ackpt2532N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Riddhi Mishra

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263Section 3Section 45Section 45(3)

No.1862/Mum/2022 A.Ys. 2015-16 2 Dhyaneshwar Nivrutti Talapade Vs. Pr.CIT 3. The Pr. CIT failed to conduct independent enquiry in applying provisions of Section 45(3) of the Act before directing the A.O. to apply the said provisions.” 2. There was a delay in filing this appeal by 430 days

Bharat Mines and Minerals, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 974/BANG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2011 – 12

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep &For Respondent: Shri A. Ramesh Kumar, D.R

Section 10BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

said section. Therefore, both profit/loss from all the share delivery transactions and derivative transaction are having the same meaning, so far as Section 45(3) of the Act is concerned. In view of the fact that both delivery transactions and derivative transactions are having the same meaning

Lakshmanan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 1 (3), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2744/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2882/Chny/2018 & नि◌धा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Mr.Lakshmanan, The Income Tax Officer, No.7/2, 1St Floor, Akm Nest, Non-Corporate Ward-1(3), Jawaharlal Nehru Street, T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 017. [Pan: Aabpl 4326 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.T. Vasudevan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan

Section 43(5)Section 45

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा

Lakshmanan Revathi, Chennai vs. ITO N.C.W 1(3), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2883/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Mr.T. Vasudevan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan

Section 43(5)Section 45

Lakshmanan, Chennai vs. ITO N.C.W 1(3), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2882/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Mr.T. Vasudevan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan

Section 43(5)Section 45

DCIT Central Circle -4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Skylark Build, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 435/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Section 133ASection 143Section 153CSection 250Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 45(3)

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI BASKARAN BR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.435/Mum/2022