ACIT CENT .CIR6(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. KENNETH BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS LTD, MUMBAI
In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed
ITA 2396/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2017-18
Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhthe Asstt. Commissioner Vs. Kenneth Builders & Of Income Tax, Cc-6(4) Developers Limited Room No. 1925, 19Th 15Th Floor, Tower – 1, Floor, Air India Building, Indiabulls Finance Center Nariman Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai- 400021 Elphistone, Mumbai - 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacck8268P Appellant .. Respondent
For Appellant: Rakesh RanjanFor Respondent: K. Gopal & Om Kandalkar
Section 115JSection 143(2)
being receipt capital nature.
As regards taxability of the realisation against the depreciable assets, for levy a balancing charge under second proviso to section 10(2)(vii), it is absolutely necessary that the depreciable assets should have sold a agreed to between parties. But exchange there is reciprocal transfer ... sale of logs received against the depreciable assets could not be brought to tax against the assesse under the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii).
Accordingly, the High Court was justified in accepting the assessee’s claim...."
In the case Chheda Housing Development Corpn. v. Addl