How many judgments discuss Section 2(47)(iv)?

BharatTax indexes 15 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that discuss Section 2(47)(iv) (Section 2(47)(iv)).

“Section 2(47)(iv)”

Q: What is the leading case on Section 2(47)(iv)?

(i) Rajputana Textile (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT (42 ITR 743) is the decision most relied on for Section 2(47)(iv), cited in 15 judgments on BharatTax. Purchase of shares with the intention of selling them at a profit constitutes an adventure in the nature of trade. Such an adventure, if it results in an advantage of income nature, can be brought to tax under profits and gains from business or profession.

Q: Which cases are most cited on Section 2(47)(iv)?

(i) Rajputana Textile (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT (42 ITR 743) — 15 citing judgments; CIT v. Rasiklal Maneklal (HUF) (177 ITR 198) — 14 citing judgments; 2007) 5 SCC 447; Union of India v. Mohindra Supply Co.: AIR 1962 SC 256; Bank of England v. Vagliano Bros 39 LR (1 SCC 633) — 12 citing judgments; Hindustan Lever v. State of Maharashtra (9 SCC 438) — 11 citing judgments.

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(47)(iv)15 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 2(47)(iv) is (i) Rajputana Textile (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT (42 ITR 743), cited in 15 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 2(47)(iv)

(i) Rajputana Textile (Agencies) Ltd. v. CIT

42 ITR 743 · 1961 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Purchase of shares with the intention of selling them at a profit constitutes an adventure in the nature of trade. Such an adventure, if it results in an advantage of income nature, can be brought to tax under profits and gains from business or profession.

CIT v. Rasiklal Maneklal (HUF)

177 ITR 198 · 1989 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

An exchange is a mutual transfer of ownership of one thing for the ownership of another. This definition of exchange is consistent with the definition of 'transfer' under Section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which includes exchange or relinquishment of an asset.

2007) 5 SCC 447; Union of India v. Mohindra Supply Co.: AIR 1962 SC 256; Bank of England v. Vagliano Bros 39 LR

1 SCC 633 · 2002 · Reported

citing judgments

The levy of interest under Section 234-A of the Income Tax Act is statutory, mandatory, and automatic, meaning it cannot be a question of law that can be raised in appeal. The High Court's jurisdiction under Section 260A is limited to questions of law, and thus, observations on the levy of interest are generally outside its scope.

Hindustan Lever v. State of Maharashtra

9 SCC 438 · 2004 · Reported

citing judgments

Amalgamation, involving a compromise or arrangement sanctioned by the court, is a foundational basis for passing an order of amalgamation, and the subsequent acquisition of assets by the other undertaking signifies the loss of identity and ownership of the earlier concern.

Judgments citing Section 2(47)(iv)

Mr Popatrao Dashrathrao Suryawanshi, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(4), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 234/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 Mr. Popatrao Dashrathrao Suryawanshi Ito, Ward 7(4), Pune S.No.38, Tingre Nagar, Havaldar Mala, Vs. Vishrantwadi, Pune – 411015 Pan: Adhps2643F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora Department By : Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 19-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-01-2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 45(2)Section 54BSection 54F

both the lower authorities have given a concurrent finding that the transfer of agricultural land occurred on 20.01.2011 by virtue of provisions of section 2(47)(iv) and 2(47)(v) of the Act. He submitted that whichever stand one adopts whether conversion into stock or whether transfer of agricultural

ACIT, Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2618/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

Shri Navinchandra N. Patel, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 869/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dzouza, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 14ASection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 45(2)Section 69

disallowed. 6. Basis of forming reason to believe and details of escapement of income: (i) According to section 2(47)(iv) of the Act, if capital asset is converted into stock-in- trade or treated as stock-in-trade by the owner, such conversion or treatment shall be regarded ... true and full disclosure of the material facts; necessary for assessment under Proviso to section 147 : (i) According to. section 2(47)(iv) of the Act, if capital asset is converted into stock-in- trade or treated as stock-in-trade by the owner, such conversion or treatment shall

Sannidhi Sri Ramachandra Murthy (HUF), Rajahmundry vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 230/VIZ/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 230/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sannidhi Sriramachandra Murthy (Huf) V. The Assistant Commissioner Of D.No. 42-10-30/31 Income Tax, Circle-1 Income Tax Office, Aayakar Bhavan Sree Ramachandra Murthy Nilayam Veerabhadrapuram Mangalavarapu Peta Rajahmundry-533105 Rajahmundry – 533101 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaxhs4350L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व / Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasaai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 45(2)Section 54BSection 54ESection 54F

gains is to be charged under the head capital gains, once the said stock-in-trade is sold by the assessee As per section 2(47)(iv) of the Act, the transfer takes place when the conversion is done to the capital asset into stock-in-trade, however, the same

Nalapad Properties, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Incomer Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore

ITA 1297/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri H. Guruswamy, ITP &For Respondent: Shri Kiran D., D.R

Section 139(9)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250Section 45

charging the same to tax in the assessment year 2017-18. For answering this issue, first, we will examine whether provisions of section 2(47)(iv) or (v) of the Act is applicable to the impugned transaction, if it is so applicable the assessment year in which

Nithin Pandurang Dhond, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 661/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 45(2)Section 48

order of the ld. AO after observing as under:- “6.1.4 The provisions of section 45(2) is a charging section for capital gains. Section 2(47)(iv) of the Income-tax Act provides that any conversion of capital assets into stock-in-trade shall be regarded as a transfer. Therefore

Guruvendra Singh, Kota vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 144/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 548Section 54B

gains, is to be charged under the head capital gains, once the stock in trade is sold. Thus, although, transfer, as per Section 2(47)(iv) [Definition of transfer], happens in the year, when the conversion is done of the capital asset into stock in trade, however, the same ... ACIT, Circle-01, Kota charged under the head capital gains, once the said stock in trade is sold. Thus, although, transfer, as per Section 2(47)(iv) [Definition of transfer], happens in the year, when the conversion is done of the capital asset into stock in trade, however, the same

M/S. Thirumagal Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Dharmapuri vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3243/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2913/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Thirumagal Alloys Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 5/95, Cmelbatchhapet, Income Tax, Salem. Sennimalai Gardens, Harur, Tamil Nadu 636 903. [Pan:Aabck1431D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3243/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Thirumagal Alloys Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 5/95, Cmelbatchhapet, Income Tax, Sennimalai Gardens, Harur, Circle I, Salem. Tamil Nadu 636 903. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Murali, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao,: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Salem, Dated 01.03.2018 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, CIT

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

favour of Shri P. Parameswaran of Tirupattur and received amount to the extent of ₹.3,00,78,887/-. As per section 2(47)(iv) of the Act, any transaction by way of agreement or arrangement or in any other manner whatsoever has the effect of transferring or enabling the enjoyment ... handed over possession to Shri P. Parameswaran for consideration of ₹.3,00,78,887/- and thus satisfies all the ingredients laid down in section 2(47)(iv) of the Act and the said 9 I.T.A. Nos.2913/Chny/18 & 3243/Chny/19 amount was treated as sale consideration received and brought to tax. On appeal

Thirumagal Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Harur vs. ACIT Circle 1, Hosur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2913/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, CIT

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

DCIT Circle- 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 928/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year : 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamar, D.R

Section 145Section 14ASection 92CSection 92F

Fixed Assets to Stock in Trade) & Business income (pertaining to revenue accruing thereafter). 55. Our attention was drawn towards the provision of section 2(47)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") "transfer, in relation to a capital asset, includes, - …… ……. 30 M/s. The Bombay Dyeing

ACIT, Circle - 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 3299/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year : 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamar, D.R

Section 145Section 14ASection 92CSection 92F

ACIT, Circle - 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. The Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 2779/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year : 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamar, D.R

Section 145Section 14ASection 92CSection 92F

Smt Munilakshamamma, Bangalore vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-7, Bangalore

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

ITA 880/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sri.T.Srinivas Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT-DR

Section 132Section 2(14)Section 2(47)(v)Section 45Section 53A

possession by the Owner in part performance of this agreement under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act or under Section 2(47)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 1.2) The Owner hereby agrees not to interfere or interrupt in the course of construction and development

Sri Hanumanthiah, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Bangalore

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

ITA 205/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

Section 148Section 2(47)(v)Section 53A

Shri Krishna Prasad Mikklineni, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 929/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Biju, D.R

Section 53A