← All Phrases

“Section 45(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 45Section 45(4)46 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 45(4) is CIT v. Lakhani Marketing Inc. (49 Taxmann.com 257), cited in 145 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 45(4)

CIT v. Lakhani Marketing Inc.
49 Taxmann.com 257 · 2014 · High Court
145
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot exceed the actual tax-exempt income earned by the assessee during the relevant year. If no tax-exempt income is earned, no disallowance under Section 14A is warranted.

Commissioner of Income-tax v. Nizam's Suppl. Religious Endowment Trust
127 ITR 378 · 1981 · High Court
87
citing judgments

Income of a charitable trust, other than from a business undertaking covered by Section 11(4), is determined based on its books of account. Payments of income tax and wealth tax by the trust are considered an application of income for charitable purposes under Section 11.

Sunil Siddharthbhai v. CIT
156 ITR 509 · 1985 · Supreme Court
82
citing judgments

A partner's contribution of a personal asset to a partnership firm does not amount to a "transfer" for capital gains purposes under the Income-tax Act, as the consideration (the partner's interest in the firm) is indeterminate, and the computational machinery for capital gains fails.

CIT v. Hariprasad & Company Pvt. Ltd.
99 ITR 118 · 1975 · Supreme Court
78
citing judgments

The terms 'income' or 'profits and gains' are inclusive of losses, signifying that losses are 'minus income' to be factored into the computation of taxable income. Therefore, set-off and carry forward provisions for losses apply exclusively to taxable income or gains and cannot be pressed into service against non-taxable gains, such as those exempt under a DTAA or other specific provisions.

Pr. CIT v. Devangi
394 ITR 184 · 2017 · High Court
61
citing judgments

In an assessment completed under section 153A, only undisclosed income and undisclosed assets detected during a search can be brought to tax.

CIT v. Mohanbhai Pamabhai
91 ITR 393 · 1973 · High Court
31
citing judgments

The distribution of capital assets to a partner upon the dissolution of a partnership firm does not constitute a 'transfer' and is therefore not taxable as capital gains.

V.M Salgaocar & Bros (P) Ltd. v. CIT
247 ITR 210 · 2001 · High Court
27
citing judgments

When the Supreme Court decides an issue, the orders of the authorities below merge with the order of the Supreme Court. This applies to appeals before the Supreme Court.

Addl. CIT v. Mohanbhai Pamabhai
165 ITR 166 · 1987 · Supreme Court
26
citing judgments

When a partner retires from a partnership firm and receives consideration, including a proportionate share of goodwill, it is not considered a transfer for capital gains tax purposes.

Judgments citing Section 45(4)

Gokulakrishna, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay

ITA 1088/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: yeast Ft az A/For Respondent: arare 41 aréra/
Section 147Section 250

over the assets of the firm when the firm is still in existence and at best, the said transaction could be envisaged under section 45(4) of the Act to tax in the hands of the firm and not in the hands of the partners of the firm ... case on hand is not a distribution of -10- ITA No.1088/Chiny/2025 SA. No. 48/Chiny/25 assets/value of the assets by the firm for section 45(4) of the Act to be made applicable, but a sale/transfer of partnership interest being the ownership interest held by the old partner in the partnership

Proxima Creations, Pune vs. PCIT, Pune-2, Pune

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

ITA 1041/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1041/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Proxima Creations, Vs. Pcit, Pune-2. Prop. -1, Business Centre, Level-1, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aakfp9790Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date Of Hearing : 08.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Pcit, Pune-2 [Ld. Pcit’] For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Order Passed By The Ld. Principal Cit U/S 263 Is Not Tenable Either In Law Or In The Facts Of The Case As The Order Passed By The Ao U/S 144 Did Not Contain Any Error Which Was Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. 2. Order Passed By The Additional Principal Cit U/S 263 Is Bad In Law Being Violative Of Principle Of Natural Justice. 3. The Ld. Principal Cit Has Erred In Holding That Two Different Sets Of Profit & Loss Accounts Were Prepared By The Assessee.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 263Section 45(4)

been given by him. 6. The Ld. Principal CIT is not justified in directing the AO to consider the issue of applicability of section 45(4) without giving notice of the same to assessee and without giving the assesse an opportunity to offer his explanation in the matter ... furnished first appeal before Ld. CIT(A) which is still pending. We also find that according to Ld. 6 PCIT, provisions of section 45(4) of the IT Act has not been looked into by the FAO while passing the assessment order. Under the above facts and circumstances

Ila Jitendra Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle 8(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5219/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Ganatra, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 133Section 139(1)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

case of "ACIT vs. Thermoflics India Ltd. " (supra). He has further submitted that the assessee was of the view that even if section 45(4) was applicable to distribution of capital assets on retirement, the value of stock in trade was to be excluded from the value of net assets ... negative balance and under such circumstances the assessee was under the bonafide belief that there was no liability for capital gains tax under section 45(4). There was no intention of the assessee to evade tax. That full particulars were disclosed. The assessee had not declared capital gains under bonafide

M/S. Anand Diagnostic Laboratory, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bengaluru

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

ITA 969/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Netrapal M S, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 143Section 143(3)

learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Bengaluru erred in confirming the addition of Rs.49,00,12,501/- under the provisions of section 45(4) of the act ignoring the factual position that there were no transfer of assets consequent to alleged distribution and in the absence of any such ... there was undue benefit conferred on them and in this context it was held that, such benefit is taxable under the provisions of section 45(4) of the act, on the contrary in the appellant case there was business valuation before admitting new partners. The Good Will arose on account

M/S. Anand Diagnostic Laboratory, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bengaluru

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

ITA 968/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Netrapal M S, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 143Section 143(3)

learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Bengaluru erred in confirming the addition of Rs.49,00,12,501/- under the provisions of section 45(4) of the act ignoring the factual position that there were no transfer of assets consequent to alleged distribution and in the absence of any such ... there was undue benefit conferred on them and in this context it was held that, such benefit is taxable under the provisions of section 45(4) of the act, on the contrary in the appellant case there was business valuation before admitting new partners. The Good Will arose on account

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Pvr Tourist Home, Cochin

ITA 428/COCH/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1, Non-Corporate .......... Appellant Iind Floor, C.R. Building, I.S. Press Road Ernakulam 682018 Vs. Pvr Tourist Home .......... Respondent Palarivattom, Kochi 682025 [Pan: Aadfp3442Q] Appellant By: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, Cit-Dr Respondent By: Shri Mohan Pulickal, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 10.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.03.2025

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Mohan Pulickal, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 45(4)Section 48Section 50Section 50(1)Section 50A

finding of the Tribunal that the charge of Short Term Capital Gains, in the instant case, has to be as mandated in Section 45(4) of the Income Tax Act, we remand the matter back to the Tribunal for computing the extent of short-term capital gains, if any, that ... Revenue preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue applying the provisions of section 45(4) of the Act. The relevant portion of the order reads as under: - “9.9 Now the question is whether section 45(4) covers transfer only transfer on dissolution

Arthi Baliga, Chennai vs. ACIT, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1559/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1559/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arthi Baliga, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 15, Flat No. 3-C, Coral Woods Income Tax, Chennai-4, Apartment, Sri Ram Nagar, South Chennai. Street, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Bkjpb5416P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate & Shri Varun Ranganathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-4, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

liability. 10. The ld. AR further submits that the settled principles of Partnership Law, even under the Income Tax Act, 1961, section 45(4) r.w. section 189, lays down the same proposition that the capital gains must be taxed in the hands of the firm. He referred to section 45 ... Nothing in this section shall affect the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 159. 11. He argued that even as per section 45(4) r.w.s 189, the capital gains are liable to be assessed only under section 45(4) r.w. section 189 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assuming

Sahibzada Timber and Ply Private Limited, Mohali vs. DCIT, ACIT Central Circle-2, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 699/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 699/Chd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s Sahibzada Timber & Ply Private Limited B41-42, Phase-3, Indl. Aera, SAS Nagar Mohali, Punjab बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-2 Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAQCS2239G अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Mohit Dhiman, C.A राजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR Shri Dharam Vir, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of He

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Dhiman, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 50C

certain situations where the Assessing Officer is required to determine the fair market value. One of the situations is indicated in section 45(4) of the said Act where the profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset by way of distribution of capital assets ... full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer. In a situation, as one obtaining under section 45(4) of the Act, since there is no apparent consideration for the transfer of the asset, the full value of the consideration has to be determined

Shri Deepak Suresh Gadge, Nagpur vs. Dy. CIT, Circle-1, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

ITA 23/NAG/2018[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 234A

that phase which would be equal to the amount received by the firm i.e., ` 6,52,75,227, within the meaning of section 45(4) of the Act. Accordingly, in the hands of the assessee, the cost would have been ` 6,52,75,227, for the purpose of 9 Shri ... purpose of computing capital gain tax. We further find that the said firm was liable to be taxed as per provision of section 45(4) of the Act for the assessment year 2012-2013 and the assessee ought to have filed its return of income taking into consideration the cost

Rajkamal Stone Metal Works, Ambegaon Khurd, Dist. Pune vs. ACIT Circle 5 Pune, Pune

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

ITA 691/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 2(47)Section 45Section 47

with transfer of a capital asset by a person to a firm, by way of distribution of the capital assets of the firm. Section 45 (4) of the Act reads as under:- "Section 45 (4) The profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset ... case of Mansukh Dyeing and Printing Mills, [2022] 145 taxmann.com 151 (SC), wherein it held, "7.2 The object and purpose of introduction of section 45(4) was to pluck the loophole by insertion of section 45(4) and omission of section 2(47)(ii) While introduction to section 45(4

M/S. Atria Wind (Kadambur) Private Limited, Bengaluau vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 692/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Vilas V. Shinde, D.R
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234BSection 47

ITA No.692/Bang/2024 M/s. Atria Wind (Kadambur) Private Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI

Shree Estates, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 469/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.469/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shree Estates Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 14(1) Pan:Adifs9997B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 31/07/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT(DR)
Section 68

revaluation of existing assets and crediting revaluation reserve to the partner capital account. Therefore, the learned CIT (A) invoked the provisions of section 45(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961 which deals with the profits or gain arising from the transfer of a capital asset by way of distribution ... partners’ capital account is available for withdrawal by the partners which fall in the category of ‘OTHERWISE’ as stated under the provisions of section 45(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and thus, by following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Mansukh

DCIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Ramona Pinto, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 345/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Milin Datani, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 250Section 28

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Jayshree Shailesh Savla, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal o

ITA 2304/MUM/2024[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Income Tax Officer, Jayshree Shailesh Savla, Room No. 216, 2Nd Floor, A/7, Mani Bhavan, Swastik Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Society N S Road, No. 3, Bandra East, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400056. Pan No. Aksps 2546 R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: None
Section 54F

partnership firm is not liable to capital gain tax in hands o capital gain tax in hands of said partner in view of section 45(4). f said partner in view of section 45(4). 7.2.4. In James P. D'Silva v. Deputy Commissioner of Income 7.2.4. In James

Urmila Uttam Jhavar, Mumbai vs. Faceless, Delhi

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

ITA 208/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal: A.Y : 2018-19 Urmila Uttam Jhavar Vs Principal Commissioner Of 2 Homestead, . Income Tax Officer, Mumbai. 16, Dattatraya Road, Santa Cruz, (Respondent) Mumbai 400 054. Pan : Aaapj8879N (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JotwaniFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54F

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL

B.V. Jewels, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 21, Mumbai

ITA 2064/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2024AY 2005-06
Section 41(1)Section 45(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM Ι

Varsha Shrikant Paranjape, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax - 25(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3252/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhvarsha Shrikant Vs. Acit, Circle 25(3) Paranjape, Paranjape C-10, 6Th Floor, Room No. Bungalow, 2Nd Floor, 34, 601, Pratyaksha Kar Mg Road, Vile Parle Bhavan, Bandra Kurla (East), Mumbai – 400057 Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 51 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaapp6199H Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Ronak Doshi, Chaitanya Doshi & Karan Jain Respondent By : Vithal Machindra Bhosale Date Of Hearing 05.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20.10.2023

For Appellant: Ronak DoshiFor Respondent: Vithal Machindra Bhosale
Section 147Section 148Section 234Section 234BSection 45(4)

P a g e | 1 Varsha Shrikant Paranjape Vs. ACIT, Circle 25(3) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F

M/S Charis Agro and Cold Storage, Belgavi vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Belgavi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 19/PAN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji20 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Balu AnandFor Respondent: Shri P.S. Shivshankar
Section 154Section 263Section 45(4)

order passed u/s. 263 of the Act directing the AO to examine the issue of non-levy of capital gains as per section 45(4) of the Act is not maintainable. The ld. DR drew our attention to the order dated 26-03-2018 passed ... argued that the Pr. CIT raised issue in 263 proceedings itself regarding non-levy of capital gains as per section 45(4) of the Act and by mistake there was no direction given in the said order. He vehemently argued that the Pr. CIT is the well within its jurisdiction

Tree Hill Estates Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1395/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Ind- Sing Developers (P) Ltd., Bangalore

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

ITA 202/BANG/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Jm

For Appellant: S/Sri. G.S.Prashanth, CA and Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40

being introduced by the assessee into the ADP, during the relevant previous year. M/s.Ind Sing Developers Private Limited 27 ........... . It is clear from Section 45(4) of the Act, that profits and gain if any, arising on transfer of capital by way of distribution of capital assets is assessable