← All Phrases

“section 50CA”

Capital GainsSection 50CASection 50CA35 judgments

Judgments citing section 50CA

Dayal Agro Products Ltd, Akola vs. JCIT, Akola Range, Akola

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 201/NAG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri K.P.Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Benjwal, CIT DR
Section 250

fair market value as full value of consideration for transfer of unquoted shares has been brought into effect from assessment year 2018-19 under Section 50CA of the I.T. Act, 1961. This section specifically provides that where consideration for transfer of unquoted shares is less than fair market value ... subsequent assessment years. It is clear in that assessment year 2010-11 under reference that no addition can be made by resorting to Section 50CA. Further, u/s 48 of the I.T. Act, 1961, to calculate “capital gain”, costs of acquisition has to be deducted from full value of consideration. Full

Shri Neerav Shailesh Parekh, Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 535/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 48

High Court in (2017) 87 Taxmann.com 84. d) Eldeco Infrastructure & Properties Limited (2012) 23 Taxmann.com 17 (Delhi) 6. The Ld. AR further submitted that Section 50CA is the Section which allows the Assessing Officer to substitute the sale consideration with respect to the transfer of unquoted shares but the said

Bito-Lagertechnik Bittmann Gmbh, Garmany vs. ACIT Circle 1(1)(2), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2440/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Dec 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 197Section 234ASection 234BSection 270ASection 48Section 50CSection 56(2)(x)

computation of capital gains. 1.2 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO/DRP has erred in their understanding that Section 50CA of the Act, read with Rule 11UAA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (‘Rules’), provides an upper limit 2 BITO-Lagertechnik Bittmann GmbH ... price was on account of – (a) the deeming fiction created under the Act for determination of “fair market value” for the limited purpose of Section 50CA of the Act; and (b) consequently, differences in the method of valuation that were adopted. 1.9 On the facts and circumstances of the case

Nearbuy Pte.. Ltd, Singapore vs. ACIT (Intl Tax) Circle 3(3) (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1607/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “I” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM

Elvis Zepherin Crasto, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Int Tax Ward 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1921/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleelvis Zepherin Crasto V. Income Tax Officer Gorai Village, Jui Pada International Taxation Gorai Essel World Road Ward – 2(1)(1) Borivali (W), Mumbai - 400091 Room No. 1724, 17Th Floor Air India Building Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Asgpc6280N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 144C(5)Section 56(2)Section 69

means that the properties have been bought and sold at those prices and the Id. AO cannot tax the assessee by taking shelter of Section 50CA and Section 56(2) of the IT Act. The assessee was not having such a huge cash Rs.2,07,56,500 for investing

Jm Financial Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3987/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)

avoid commercial inconvenience with no foundation and facts and with disregard for evidence on record. Another argument presented by the Ld.AR is that section 50CA of the Act has been inserted by the Finance Act, 2017 with effect from 02/04/2018 and therefore, the said insertion for valuation of capital asset ... arriving at the sale consideration determines the nature of transaction. Further there is merit in the submission of the ld AR that since section 50CA of the Act is inserted by the Finance Act, 2017 with effect from 02/04/2018 and therefore, the said insertion for valuation of capital asset transferred

DCIT 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. J.M. Financial Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3925/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)

avoid commercial inconvenience with no foundation and facts and with disregard for evidence on record. Another argument presented by the Ld.AR is that section 50CA of the Act has been inserted by the Finance Act, 2017 with effect from 02/04/2018 and therefore, the said insertion for valuation of capital asset ... arriving at the sale consideration determines the nature of transaction. Further there is merit in the submission of the ld AR that since section 50CA of the Act is inserted by the Finance Act, 2017 with effect from 02/04/2018 and therefore, the said insertion for valuation of capital asset transferred

Jagdeep Bhargava, Hisar vs. Pr. CIT, Hisar

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

ITA 1279/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Jain, CAFor Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 271Section 50C

used the colorable device to avoid the payment of tax by dubious method, which is also taken under the purview of taxation by inserting section 50CA in the Act by the Finance Act, 2017. Therefore, Long term capital gain on the sale of shares in the present case needs

Shankar Dayal HUF, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-30(7), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2200/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Singhavi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ram Dhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 251(1)(a)Section 50CSection 54E

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHIBENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar

Asst CIT 11(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Zoeteis India Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 3285/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2010-11
Section 50C

this regard, attention is invited to the Memorandum to the Finance Act, 2017, which also acknowledges that prior to the insertion of section 50CA, capital gain was computed by taking into account the amount of full value of consideration received or accrued on transfer of a capital asset Relevant extract ... relating to deeming of full value of consideration for computation of income under the head "capital gains", it is proposed to insert a new section 50CA to provide that where consideration for transfer of share of a company (other than quoted share) is less than the Fair Market Value

Tyco Fire and Security India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 270/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.270/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Acit, M/S. Tyco Fire & Security India Private Limited, Vs. D-601, Rmz Centennial, Circle - 7(1)(1), Kundalahalli Main Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan : Aabct 0087 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Rajan Vora, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 27/11.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

both and are not applicable to the sale of shares, with which we are concerned in this appeal. 51. Finance Act, 2017 inserted new section 50CA in the Act w.e.f 1st April, 2018 to provide that where consideration for transfer of unquoted equity share of a company is less than

M/S United Spirits Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Special Range-7, Bangalore

In the result, ground 7 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3091/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am It(Tp)A No.3091/Bang/2018 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 M/S.United Spirits Limited The Joint Commissioner Of 6Th Floor, Ub Towers, Income-Tax, Special Range-7 V. Bangalore. # 24 Vittal Mallya Road Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aaccm8043J. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior Counsel and Sri.Ankur Pai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT –DR
Section 115PSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. M/S Bioworth India Private Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 679/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, C.A by RevenueFor Respondent: Shri K Sankar Ganesh, JCIT (DR) by
Section 133(6)Section 37

permitted the AG to substitute the actual sale consideration of shares with deemed sale consideration. It is imperative to mention that the provisions of Section 50CA of the Act was Page 16 of 27 inserted by the Finance Act, 2017 which was made applicable from 01.04.2018. This clearly shows that ... which taxes the price differential in the hands of the "purchaser" and not the "seller" of shares. As pointed out earlier, the provisions of Section 50CA was brought in to tax the price differential between actual sale consideration and 'FMV' only from AY 2018-19 and onwards. Having

M/S. United Spirits Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2701/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.United Spirits Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of Ub Towers, Income-Tax, Circle 7(1)(1) V. No.24 Vittal Mallya Road Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aaccm8043J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022 Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 12.10.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2013-2014. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Manufacture & Sale Of Alcoholic Beverage. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 On 28.11.2013 Which Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment. During The Course Of Assessment, The Assessee’S Case Was Also Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo). The Tpo Vide Order Dated 26.10.2016, Recommended Transfer Pricing Adjustments. The A.O., Thereafter, Passed A Draft Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2016. 2 It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 M/S.United Spirits Limited.

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 234CSection 36(1)(iii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “C”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Ms.Padmavathy S, AM IT

M/S. Asaria Lalji Vador, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT -7, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 559/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Blem/S. Asaria Lalji Vador V. Office Of Pcit – 27 C-21, Mahavir Jyot Room No. 401, 4Th Floor Opp. Odeon Shopping Centre Tower No. 6 Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai -400077 Vashi Railway Station Building Complex Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400703 Pan: Aabpv0149A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pradip Kapasi Department By : Ms. Shailja Rai

For Appellant: Shri Pradip KapasiFor Respondent: Ms. Shailja Rai
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54E

submitted that the facts are exactly similar to the A.Y. 2015-16. He submitted that section 50CA of the Act was introduced in the Act which are applicable from A.Y. 2018-19. Further, he submitted that the assessee has sold the shares of same company