“Section 2(47)(ii)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(47)(ii)25 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 2(47)(ii) is Vania Silk Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (191 ITR 647), cited in 38 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 2(47)(ii)

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

191 ITR 647 · 1991 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

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.

CIT v. A.N.Naik Associates

265 ITR 346 · 2004 · High Court

citing judgments

Capital gains arising from the distribution of capital assets on the dissolution of a firm or other association of persons, or otherwise, are taxable under section 45(4) based on the fair market value of the asset on the date of transfer. This applies even to reconstitutions of partnership businesses as part of a family settlement.

R 222 (SC) P.H. Dwivecha vs. CIT Page 84 of 155 53 ITR 261 (SC) Kettlewell Bullen& Co. Ltd. v. CIT

351 ITR 110 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

The nature and character of a receipt, whether it is of a capital or revenue nature, depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, particularly the purpose for which the payment was made.

Judgments citing Section 2(47)(ii)

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Datla Shanti, Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 33/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri I. Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao

Section 129Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54F

आयकर अपील"यअ"धकरण, "वशाखापटणम पीठ, "वशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी दु"वू" आर एल

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)

said that the assessee ever acquired any interest in the property. No doubt extinguishment is also covered in the definition of transfer under section 2(47)(ii). However, extinguishment would normally connote a situation where an asset goes out of existence. P a g e | 17 However, when the asset

ITO - 25(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Rajni D. Saini, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7120/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 7120/मुं/2018 (िन.व. 2014-15) Income Tax Officer- 25(3)(3), Room No.606, 6Th Floor, C-10, Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400 051 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Rajni D. Saini 6, Lalit Kunj, Dadabhai Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai 400 056. Pan: Aacps-7288-J ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Smt. Shailaja Rai "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Dr. K. Shivram With Shri Shashi Bekal सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 11/08/2022 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 09/11/2022 आदेश/ Order This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 37, Mumbai [ In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 4/10/2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Revenue In Appeal Has Raised Eight Grounds Assailing The Findings Of Cit(A) Deleting Addition Of Rs.5,13,25,000/- U/S. 56(2)(Vii)(B) Of The Income Tax

For Appellant: Smt. Shailaja RaiFor Respondent: Dr. K. Shivram with Shri Shashi Bekal

Section 56(2)(vii)

given letter of allotment which clearly described the precise number of premises so allotted to him. As per the provisions of section 2(47)(ii), “Transfer” in relation to capital assets includes the extinguishment of any right therein. This letter of allotment extinguishes the rights of builder in the said

Sri Anjaneyalu Prathipathi, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2838/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Years: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar, CIT(TP-2-DR) (ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 153CSection 2Section 234

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT

Chaturanan Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 3565/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar[Assessment Year: 2009-10] Chaturanan Industries Ltd. The Dcit, H-108, Connaught Circus, Central Circle-20(Now Cc-8), New Delhi-110001 New Delhi-110055 Pan-Aaacc0762G Assessee Revenue

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 2(14)Section 2(47)(ii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER