M/S JAICO AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(5), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2007-08

53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1982)" 57. The importance of the word "transfer" is due to the reason that under the charging section, viz. section 45, the capital gain

SHRI BINDIGANAVALE RAVI ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2015-16

Section 2(47)(v) of the IT Act. The construction of the apartment was for and on behalf of the Appellant for which the cost was incurred from time to time as per the scheme of payment provided in the agreement and accordingly the Appellant had rightly computed the Cost Inflation Index while computing the capital gain. Further

SRI ALAGAPPA ANNAMALAI(HUF),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed\nand revenue appeals are dismissed

53A of the Transfer of Property Act. As such, the contractual\nobligation of the developer was not met with in the assessment year 2005-2006.\nBeing so, the conditions laid down in section 2(47)(v) of the I.T. Act cannot be\ninvoked so as to have the capital gains

SRI ALAGAPPA MUTHIAH(HUF),BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed\nand revenue appeals are dismissed

53A of the Transfer of Property Act. As such, the contractual\nobligation of the developer was not met with in the assessment year 20052006.\nBeing so, the conditions laid down in section 2(47)(v) of the I.T. Act cannot be\ninvoked so as to bring the capital gains

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU vs. ALAGAPPA ANNAMALAI (HUF), BENGALURU

The appeals of the assessees are allowed\nand revenue appeals are dismissed

53A of the Transfer of Property Act. As such, the contractual\nobligation of the developer was not met with in the assessment year 2005-2006.\nBeing so, the conditions laid down in section 2(47)(v) of the I.T. Act cannot be\ninvoked so as to have the capital gains

SMT. SAVITRI KADUR,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed to the extent indicated above

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2008-09

gain is charged to tax in the previous year in which the transfer takes place. Section 2(47) defines what is transfer and it reads as follows : Page 5 of 23 (47) "transfer", in relation to a capital asset, includes,— (i) the sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset; or (ii) the extinguishment of any rights therein

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S. R. MUNIRAJU (HUF), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the revenue and the CO by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2010-11

capital gains under the Income-tax Act, it has been held thus: "11. In order that the provisions of section 53A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S. N G BALU REDDY HUF, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2009-10

Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, it had been held that, in a joint development agreement, the relevant date for attracting capital gain

NALAPAD PROPERTIES ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMER TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3) , BANGALORE

capital gains tax arises in the\nsame year as that of the year of JDA and the ratio laid down\nin the above judicial decision is applicable in respect of the\ncapital asset as per section 2(47)(v) r.w.s 53A

MR. RAMESH KUMAR,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), MANGALURU

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

capital gains tax under Section 45 of the Act could not be levied for this Assessment Year.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "2(47)(v)", "53A

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. C. NARASIMHAIAH, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as cross

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

Section 143(3) by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(4), Bangalore is opposed to Law and Facts and Circumstances of the case. Hence, the Assessee has come up with this appeal. 2. The moot question to be decided and answered in this appeal 4 ITA No.206(B)/12 & C.O. No.4(B)2015 - whether gains arisen is "Long

M/S PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECTS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-18(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Shri Chandra Poojari, Am

section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. On these facts, it is not possible to hold that the transferee was willing to perform its obligations in the financial year in which the capital gains

K S HANUMANTHA RAO,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-2, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K

53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. New sub-clauses (v) and (vi) have been inserted in section 2(47) to prevent avoidance of capital gains

SRI MAHENDRASINGH RAMSINGH JADAV,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(5), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. New sub-clauses (v) and (vi) have been inserted in section 2(47) to prevent avoidance of capital gains

M/S AGNUS HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2006-07

section 53A of the T.P. Act. As such, no capital gain could be assessed in this assessment year under consideration

MR.RAHIL MAHESH KUMAR NIZAMUDDIN ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-1(2), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15

53A of the TP Act. As such, the contractual obligation of the developer was not made within the assessment year 2014-15. Being so, the condition laid down in section 2(47)(v) of the Act cannot be invoked so as to bring the capital gain

SRI. A.R. PRASAD,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

capital gains is chargeable to tax in the subject AY. the Appellants would be eligible for claim of exemption under section 54F of the Act on the 21 flats received by them in lieu of the land they parted with." 3. The Appellants, at this juncture also wish to draw a reference to the amendment to the said section with

SMT. A.P. LAKSHMI GOWRI,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

capital gains is chargeable to tax in the subject AY. the Appellants would be eligible for claim of exemption under section 54F of the Act on the 21 flats received by them in lieu of the land they parted with." 3. The Appellants, at this juncture also wish to draw a reference to the amendment to the said section with