banner_ad

Meaning of 'transfer' under section 2 (47) of the Income Tax Act


Last updated: 22 September 2021

Court :
ITAT Hyderabad

Brief :
These Revenue’s and assessee’s cross-appeals for AY.2008-09 arise against the CIT(A)-II, Hyderabad’s order(s) dated 11-11-2014, in case No.0270 / CIT(A)-II, Hyd /2014-15, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act.

Citation :
125/Hyd/2015

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)
BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

125/Hyd/2015 2008-09

The
Dy.Commissioner of
Income Tax,
Circle-3(1),
HYDER ABAD

vs

Sri H.Suresh,
HYDERABAD
[PAN: BACPS7997H]

181/Hyd/2015 2008-09

Sri H.Suresh,
HYDERABAD
[PAN: BACPS7997H]

vs

The
Asst. Commissioner
of Income Tax,
Circle-3(1),
HYDERABAD

For Revenue : Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
For Assessee : Shri Samuel Nagadesi, AR
Date of Hearing : 04-05-2021
Date of Pronouncement : 13-09-2021
O R D E R

These Revenue’s and assessee’s cross-appeals forbAY.2008-09 arise against the CIT(A)-II, Hyderabad’s order(s) dated 11-11-2014, in case No.0270 / CIT(A)-II, Hyd /2014-15, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]; respectively.

2. The Assessing Officer noticed during the course of scrutiny that this assessee had admitted NIL income in his return dt.26-09-2008. He therefore went by the assessee’s foregoing admission u/s.131 of the Act to make the impugned additional income addition of Rs.2.90 crores.

3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to rival pleadings and find no merit in either parties’ identical grievance(s). This is for the precise reason that the Revenue cannot be stated to an aggrieved party once the CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to go by the stamp price of the twin immoveable properties received by the assessee in the compromise agreement/settlement deed dt.10-12-2007 with the co-directors as even the corresponding statutory provision i.e., Section 50C also adopts the very price only to be the maximum sale consideration for computing capital gains. We thus decline the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance as well as the main appeal ITA No.125/Hyd/2015.

5. These Revenue’s and assessee’s cross-appeals ITA Nos.125/Hyd/2015 & 181/Hyd/2015 are dismissed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13th September, 2021.

Please find attached the enclosed file for the full judgement

 

CCI Pro

Comments




CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members

Follow us
add to google news



Company
ARTICLESHIP 15 May 2026
Audit Assistant / Article Trainee / Intern

SSGS and Associates

Chennai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
23 May 2026
Article Assistant

Geeta Manchanda & CO.

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
08 May 2026
Paid Assistants

Quick Taxperts Private Limited

Bengaluru

Graduate (Any)

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 28 May 2026
Accounts, Audit & Compliance Executive

Shyam Joshi & Associates

Pune

B.Com

View Details
Company
16 May 2026
Account & Audit Asst

RAHUL KHANDEBHARAD & ASSOCIATES

Nashik

B.Com

View Details
Company
Featured 27 May 2026
Lead Conversion Executive / Sales Closing Executive

SMJ global advisors pvt ltd

New Delhi

B.Com

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 31 May 2026
Article Assistant

KPRS And Associates

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
08 May 2026
CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT

SHAH LADHA AND ASSOCIATE

Ahmedabad

CA

View Details