“transfer of capital asset”

DCIT -26(1), Mumbai vs. Shreyas Builders, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2404/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit-17(1) बिधम/ Shreyas Builders Room No. 117, 1St Floor, G- A-42, 4Th Floor Roop Vs. Block, Kautliya Bhavan, Darshan, Juhu Lane, Bandra Kurla Complex, Andheri (West), Mumbai- Mumbai-400051. 400058. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aapfs5485E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bhadresh Doshi Revenue By: Dr. Kishor Dhule (Cit,Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Nfac, [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit”], Delhi Dated 08.05.2023 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. In The Several Grounds Raised In The Appeal, The Revenue Has Agitated The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Holding That The Assessee Was Engaged In The Business Of Real Estate Development & Therefore The Plot Of Land Held By It Was In Nature Of ‘Stock-In-Trade’ As Opposed To The Ao’S Action Of Holding The Said Plot Of Land To Be In Nature Of ‘Capital Asset’. According To Revenue Therefore, Since The Said Plot Of Land To Be In Nature Of ‘Capital Asset’, The Levy Of Capital Gains Tax Stood Triggered Upon Execution Of Joint Development Agreement (Herein

contention of the assessee for the reasons set out in Para 5 of the assessment order. Instead, the AO held that there was transfer of ‘capital asset’ in relevant AY 2013-14 by way of grant of development rights in land by the assessee to the Developer resulting in accrual ... transfer in the F.Y.2012-13 and liable for Capital gain tax. 6. In view of the above discussion, it is hereby held that transfer of capital assets has been done in F.Y.2012-13 by way of granting the development rights in the instant case and profits and gains have been accrued

Krishnamurthy Thagarajan, Bangalore vs. ACIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.1651/मुं/2013 (िन.व. 2008-09) Krishnamurthy Thiagarajan, No.41, 36Th Main Dollar Scheme, Btm Layout, 1St Stage, Bangalore – 560 068. Pan: Aadpk-5126-C ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Acit, Circle 6(3),Mumbai, Room No.522 (5Th Floor), Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Miteshkumar Gupta, Ca With Shri V.Shivkumar, Ca Revenue By : Shri P.D.Chougule, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2024 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 20/02/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-12, Mumbai [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 08/11/2012, For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. In Appeal Assessee Has Assailed Additions/Disallowances On Account Of: (I) Management Fee Paid To M/S. Bnp Paribas Investment Services India Pvt. Ltd. – Rs.1,71,028/-

assessee is not allowable u/s. 48 of the Act. Section 48 allows deduction of expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with the transfer of capital asset or the cost of acquisition of asset. The management fee paid by the assessee neither relates to the expenditure in connection with ... income chargeable under the head ‘Capital Gains’. The section allows deduction in respect of expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with transfer of capital asset and the cost of acquisition and cost of improvement, if any. The contention of the assessee is that the management fee paid

Sanjay Baban Vaity, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 34(3)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10

learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in not giving a finding whether there was a transfer of capital asset as per the provisions of section 2(47)(v) since the conditions Sanjay Baban Vaity 2 as envisaged in section

Tata Sons Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

shares of TTSL. In the computation of income for capital gain, assessee had shown capital gains / losses arisen as a result of various transfer of capital assets held by it and one of the components of capital gains / loss was long term capital loss of Rs.2046 ... capital gain shall be computed by deducting from the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer of capital asset, following amounts namely expenditure Incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer, and the cost of acquisition of capital asset and cost of improvement thereto