Search: capital gains

841 results for “capital gains”+ Section 45(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 4070 Addition to Income63 Section 19561 Disallowance52 Deduction52 Section 143(3)44 Section 533 Section 14832 Section 14A30 Section 14722 Section 5422 TDS22

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE SUBRAMANIAN SARAVANAN, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Re

ITA 1132/CHNY/2023[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 54F

5. The Assessing Officer held that only that part of the construction expenditure incurred after the sale of the original asset would be eligible for expenditure incurred after the sale of the original asset would be eligible for expenditure incurred after the sale of the original asset would be eligible for exemption under Section 54 of the said

MOSBACHER INDIA LLC,CHENNAI vs. ADDL. DIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1085/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 42(2)Section 42(2)(b)

45,986 Total expenditure remaining unallowed 36,62,59,800 Total expenditure incurred in the business 36,62,59,800 Profits and Gains per 42(2)(b) is lower of (i) Capital sum less expenditure unallowed 9,01,86,186 (ii)Total expenditure less exp unallowed Nil Profits as per section 42(2) Nil [5

BHARATHAN ANAND,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2630/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Dec 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

Section 48Section 49Section 54

5 -: Section 45 provides that any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset in the previous

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MANIKANDAN, CHENNAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2986/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Section 147Section 2Section 2(14)Section 2(47)Section 250Section 45Section 45(3)

45 of the Income Tax Act.”\nThe assessee is an in individual and partner of M/s. CRCL LLP\n(CRCL). The assessee filed the return of income for A.Y 2017-18 declaring\ntotal income of Rs. 48,24,760/-. The A.O received information during the\ncourse of scrutiny proceedings in the case of CRLC that the said firm has\ncredited

TAMIL NADU BRICK INDUSTRIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 744/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.744/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Tamilnadu Brick Industries, The Income Tax Officer, No. 47, Mangali Nagar 1St Street, Vs. Non Corporate Circle 8(1), Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 106. Chennai. [Pan: Aafft3643P] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Punna, Jr. Standing Counsel सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.02.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11.05.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai, Dated 27.02.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai Dated 27.02.2017 In I.T.A.No.07/Cit(A)-9/2016-17 For The Above Mentioned Assessment Year Is Contrary To Law, Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Punna

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(v)

5,500 per sq. ft. was worked out at ₹.851,70,69,000/-. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer computed the capital gains on the deemed sale of 60% of the total area at ₹.511,02,41,400/- and added the same to the total income under the head “long term capital gains”. 6 I.T.A. No.744/Chny/17 6.1 After considering the detailed written

ARTHI BALIGA,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NFAC, , DELHI

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

ITA 1559/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1559/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arthi Baliga, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 15, Flat No. 3-C, Coral Woods Income Tax, Chennai-4, Apartment, Sri Ram Nagar, South Chennai. Street, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Bkjpb5416P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate & Shri Varun Ranganathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-4, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

5) Nothing in this section shall affect the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 159. 11. He argued that even as per section 45(4) r.w.s 189, the capital gains

M/S. MAHINDRA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS LTD.,,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 4 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13, 2013-14

ITA 338/CHNY/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.870/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.338 & 339/Chny/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr.Raghavan-For Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

45 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and, accordingly, liable to capital gains tax? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the cost of lease hold right is capable of valuation and, as such, capital gains can be computed? The High Court opined that the right

JAGANNATHAN SAILAJA CHITTA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1207/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1207/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Smt. Jagannathan Sailaja Chitta, The Income Tax Officer, New No. 4, Old No. 33, Vs. International Taxation 2(2), Krishna Street, T. Nagar, Chennai 34. Chennai – 17. [Pan:Biqps3751R] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Srinivasan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.07.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 16, Chennai, Dated 27.03.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13, Wherein, Besides The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Adjudicated The Additional Ground Raised By The Assessee With Regard To The Claim Of Exemption Under Section 54F Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short], The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming Various Disallowances Made Under Section 50C Of The Act, Confirming Disallowance

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A. Srinivasan, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 50CSection 50C(1)Section 54Section 54F

section 54F of the Act and arrived at taxable long term capital gains of ₹.5,27,40,546/-. From the sale deed furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noticed that the sale consideration shown by the assessee in respect of sale of three properties is less than the value adopted by the stamp value authority for the purpose

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. KANNAN SANTHANAM, CHENNAI

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

ITA 636/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.636/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Assistant Commissioner Of Shri Kannan Santhanam, Income Tax, V. 401-A Laures 59-60, Non Corporate Circle 16, C.P. Ramasamy Road, Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 018. Pan : Aahps 1094 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCITFor Respondent: Shri P.B. Srinivasan, CA

Section 139(1)Section 2Section 54

5 I.T.A. No.636/Mds/16 representative, the capital gain would not remain with the assessee for making deposit in Capital Gains Account. 6. Referring to the judgment of Apex Court in Fibre Boards (P) Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 376 ITR 596, the Ld. representative for the assessee submitted that what is required to be deposited in the Capital Gains Account is unutilised

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

5 and 9 of the Income-tax Act.” 8.5 In view of the above decision (supra), the contention raised by the Ld. CIT, DR fails. For the reasons as afore-stated, we hold that the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source u/s.195 of the Act on the impugned payment, and therefore, the disallowance made

ABUSHA INVESTMENT & MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLP,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3417/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr.Bhabagrahi Dash, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 2(47)Section 250Section 45(1)Section 45(4)

5. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the retirement of a Partner constitutes "transfer" of capital asset as envisaged u/s 2(47) of the Act. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that unless there is a "transfer" within meaning of Section 2(47) of the Act, capital gain under section 45

INCOME TAX OFFICER NON-CORPORATE WARD-10(6), CHENNAI vs. SHRI ARUN GUPTA,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 844/CHNY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 844/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Income-Tax Officer, Shri. Arun Gupta, Non-Corporate Ward -10(6), V. No. 3B, Block, Lloyds Colony, Chennai – 34. Lloyds Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014. [Pan: Agrpa-8340-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. N.V. Balaji Advocate & Mrs. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.11.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.11.2022

For Respondent: Shri. N.V. Balaji Advocate &

Section 139(1)Section 54Section 54E

5. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee has filed a detailed written submission on the issue and contended that the assessee has satisfied conditions prescribed u/s. 54 of the Act, including depositing unutilized amount of capital gain into capital gain deposit account

T.L.SRITHARAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-14, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1596/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1596/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 T.L. Sritharan, The Assistant Commissioner Of New No. 13, (Old No. 1), V. Income Tax, Swaminathan Street, Non-Corporate Circle -14, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 033. [Pan: Aepps-6766-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate & Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT

Section 2(47)

Section 2(47), the third deals with the capital loss arising on transfer of shares. There is no dispute on whether the exchange undertaken by the assessee falls under the purview of transfer which is also in accordance with the first two decisions relied on by the assessee. The third is the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court

M/S. MAHINDRA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS LTD.,,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 4 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2012-13, 2013-14\n& 2014-15 stands dismissed

ITA 339/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

45 any profits or gains arising from the\ntransfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year, shall be chargeable to\nincome-tax under the head \"Capital gains\", and shall be deemed to be the\nincome of the previous year in which the transfer took place. \"Transfer\" is\ndefined in s. 2(47) and states that \"transfer', in relation

RAM KRISHAN KULWANT RAI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), CHENNAI

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

ITA 1047/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1047/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharath, CIT

Section 132Section 147Section 153ASection 153CSection 4

45(4) would apply only when there is distribution of asset to the partners. In view of this judgment of Madras High Court, there is no violations of the conditions stipulated in Section 47(xiii) of the Act. 15. For argument sake, if we accept that the difference between the revaluation and book value credited in the capital account

MAHINDRA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS LTD.,CHENGALPUT vs. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 870/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80

SARRANGAN ASHOK,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 15(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 544/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.544/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Shri Sarrangan Ashok, H37/12, Gita Apartments, Non Corporate Ward – 15(1),. Kumanan Street, Kalashektra Chennai. Colony, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 090. Pan: Aafpa6211N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 234Section 234ASection 45(2)Section 45(3)Section 50C

capital gains u/s 45(3) of the Act. 2.3 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not considering that the provisions of section 45(3) over rides the provisions of section 50C. 3. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in indirectly confirming the levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act amounting

P. ANANTHRAM,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE-2, COMBATORE MAIN BUILDING, 63, RACE COURSE ROAD, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/CHNY/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.155/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2016-17 P. Ananth Ram, The Asst. Commissioner Of 36, West Venkataswamy Road, Vs. Income Tax, R.S. Puram, Non Corporate Circle-2, Coimbtore – 641 002. Coimbatore. [Pan: Anxpa-6262-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri S. Marudhu Pandyan, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.12.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Marudhu Pandyan, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

45. On the other hand, Section 54EC is specific with reference to investment in specified bonds as regards the capital gain arising from and out of a long term capital asset. Thus going by the scheme of the Act and the Board circular, we accept the plea of the assessee that for taking benefit under Section

CHANDRA BHAVANI SANKAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 16(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 101/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.101/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. Shri Chandra Bhavani Sankar, The Ito, 1/3A, Vinayakar Koil Street, Ncw-16(2), Thalambur, Chennai. Chennai-600 130. [Pan: Aeypb 1764 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayanan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 54(1)Section 54FSection 68

5 :: in Tax Case Appeal No.520 of 2017 dated 06.08.2018, wherein, the Hon’ble Madras High Court on similar issues has held as under: 14. Under Section 54(1) of the said Act, the capital gain arising from transfer of a residential house is not to be charged to income tax as income of the previous year, if the assessee

C.ARYAMA SUNDARAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1208/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Durai Pandian, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(1)

45; and for the purpose of computing in respect of the new asset any capital gain arising from its transfer within a period of three years of its purchase or construction, as the :-6-: I.T.A. No.1208/Mds/2015 case may be, the cost shall be reduced by the amount of the capital gain." and CBDT Circular No. 667 dated 18.10.1993. The Assessing

Showing 1–20 of 841 · Page 1 of 43

...