← All Phrases

“circle rate”

Capital GainsSection 50CSection 50C478 judgments

The decision most relied on for circle rate is CIT v. Shivakami Co. (P.) Ltd. (159 ITR 71), cited in 133 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on circle rate

CIT v. Shivakami Co. (P.) Ltd.
159 ITR 71 · 1986 · Supreme Court
133
citing judgments

The burden of proving an understatement of consideration or the receipt of 'on-money' lies solely with the Revenue, which must provide cogent evidence of actual receipt of higher consideration, beyond mere estimates or suspicion. Additions cannot be made based on assumptions like differences from circle rates without such evidence.

Maria Fernandes Cheryl v. ITO (International Taxation)
123 Taxmann.com 252 · 2021 · ITAT
65
citing judgments

The amendment introducing a tolerance band (safe harbour) under section 50C, allowing a difference of up to 10% between actual sale consideration and stamp duty valuation, applies retrospectively. If the difference falls within this limit, the actual sale consideration is adopted as the full value of consideration for computing capital gains.

CIT v. Vummudi Amarendran
429 ITR 97 · 2020 · High Court
39
citing judgments

The first and second provisos to Section 50C(1) are retrospective in nature and applicable from the inception of the main section. The third proviso to Section 50C(1) is also retrospective and applies from the same date as the main provision.

Dharamashibhai Sonani v. Asstt. CIT
75 Taxmann.com 141 · 2016 · ITAT
26
citing judgments

The circle rate prevalent at the time of entering into an agreement is to be considered for the purpose of Section 50C, as amendments to this section have been held to be retrospectively applicable.

Nagarjuna Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-15 (1), Hyderabad
78 Taxmann.com 264 · 2017 · Reported
24
citing judgments

If a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) provides for a lower tax rate than Section 206AA, tax at source must be deducted at the lower DTAA rate, even if the non-resident deductee fails to provide their PAN. Section 206AA does not override the beneficial provisions of a DTAA.

Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd. v. ACIT, Central Circle-6(1) Chennai
46 SOT 112 · 2014 · ITAT
23
citing judgments

When an assessee provides loans to its associated enterprise (AE) using its own funds (not borrowed funds), the arm's length interest rate for such inter-company loans should be determined by considering comparable interest rates like PLR, SBI short-term rate, or LIBOR plus a markup. This principle applies even if the funds were raised through sources like zero per cent optional convertible preferential shares.

Techbooks International (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-3, Noida
63 Taxmann.com 114 · 2015 · High Court
22
citing judgments

The determination of Arm's Length Price (ALP) for international transactions involving debt requires consideration of both the amount on which interest should be charged and the arm's length rate for that interest. Guidelines are provided for computing the ALP of the international transaction of 'debt arising during the course of business.'

Joseph Mudaliar v. DCIT
130 Taxmann.com 250 · 2021 · Reported
18
citing judgments

The amendment to section 50C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by inserting the third proviso through the Finance Act, 2018, is curative and applies retrospectively. This means the tolerance band for the difference between sale consideration and stamp duty value, introduced by this amendment, is applicable to earlier assessment years.

Judgments citing circle rate

Akansha Jain, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-57(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 8785/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Akansha Jain, Vs. Ito, C-2/277, Yamuna Vihar, Ward-57(3), Delhi -110 053. New Delhi. Pan: Akkpj6488R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Advocate & Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2023 Order Per C.M. Garg: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12.07.2019 Of The Cit(A)-37, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under:- “1. The Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.85,00,000/- On Account Of Alleged Deemed Income U/S 69B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 That The Ld. Ao As Well As Ld Cit(A) Had Made The Addition Without Considering The Submissions As Well As Evidences Furnished By The Appellant. 3 That The Ld. Ao & Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Providing The Statement As Well As Cross Examination Of Sh Satvir Singh On Which Ld Ao & Ld Cit(A) Has Relied For Making Addition Of Rs. 85,00,000/- On Account Of Alleged Deemed Income U/S 69B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 4 That The Ld. Ao & Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Ignoring The Fact That The Circle Rate Of The Land Is Much Lower Than The Purchase Price Amounting Rs.15,00,000/- & Also Ignored The Fact That The Title Of The Land Is Not Clear. 5 The Addition Of Rs. 85,00,000/- Made By The Ld Ao As Well As Ld Cit(A) Is Erroneous & Arbitrary And, Therefore , The Addition Made Is Liable To Be Deleted. 6 That The Appellant Craves To Add, Amend, Alter, Vary And/Or Withdraw Or Rescind All Or Any Of The Ground Of Appeal On Or Before The Final Hearing.“

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR
Section 69B

That the Ld. AO and Ld CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in ignoring the fact that the circle rate of the land is much lower than the purchase price amounting Rs.15,00,000/- and also ignored the fact that the title of the land