Allowed

Santosh Chaudhary v. the Commissioner of Income Tax Chandigarh and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC28 Jul 2015ITA/64/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Bench, following Division Bench in C.S. Atwal case, allowed Income Tax Appeal held transfer not taxable under Section 2(47)(v) read with Section 53-A Transfer of Property Act; ITAT ignored JDA rights and possession issues; future receipts not taxable.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed dismissing the writ petition in same terms as C.S. Atwal case; transaction not taxable.

Santosh Chaudhary Vs the Commissioner of Income Tax… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

ITA No. 64 of 2015 Date of Decision:- 28.07.2015

Santosh Chaudhary

......Petitioner(s)

vs.

Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh

¶7

......Respondent(s)

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA

¶10

Present:Ms. Rinku Dahiya, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate, for the respondent.

¶12

S.J. VAZIFDAR, A.C.J. (Oral)

¶13

The matter is covered against the respondents and in favour of the appellant/assessee by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in ITA No. 200 of 2013, C.S. Atwal vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana and another decided on 22.07.2015.

¶14

The questions of law raised in this case are re-framed on the lines of the questions framed by the Division Bench in the above said judgment.

¶15

The appeal is, therefore, admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-

¶16

i) “Whether the transactions in hand envisage a “transfer” exigible to tax by reference to Section 2(47)(v) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?

¶17

SHIVANI GUPTA 2015.07.30 11:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

ii) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, has ignored rights emanating from the JDA, legal effect of non registration of JDA, its alleged repudiation etc.?

¶19

iii) Whether “possession” as envisaged by Section 2(47)(v) and Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was delivered, and if so, its nature and legal effect?

¶20

iv) Whether there was any default on the part of the developers, and if so, its effect on the transactions and on exigibility to tax?

¶21

v) Whether amount yet to be received can be taxed on an hypothetical assumption arising from the amount to be received?”

¶22

The questions of law are answered in favour of the appellant/assessee and against the respondents. The appeal is accordingly allowed in the same terms as in C.S. Atwal's case (supra).

¶23

(S.J. VAZIFDAR) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶24

(G.S. SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE

¶25

28.07.2015

¶26

shivani

¶27

SHIVANI GUPTA 2015.07.30 11:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Santosh Chaudhary v. the Commissioner of Income Tax Chandigarh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Chaudhary v. the Commissioner of Income Tax Chandigarh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Vv International Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Speedways Tyres Ltd. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Speedways Rubber Company Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S Gobind Castings P Ltd.

Satish Kumar Vs Commissioner of Income Tax

Alexandra School Vs Commissioner of Income Tax