Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2023 (8) TMI 388

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Manish Kanth i/b. Mr. Atul K. Jasani. P.C:- Following substantial questions of law are proposed:- "(a) Whether in law and in given facts and circumstances of the case, retention of 49 percent saleable area in the property by the developer represents transfer of stock in trade u/s. 45(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and therefore, capital gains on transfer of stock in trade be subjected to tax....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nner the consideration will be received by the assessee towards the transfer of stock in trade and not the fact that transfer of stock has taken place or not?" 2. In this case, Respondent-Assessee had appealed against order dated 22nd March 2016 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-12, Mumbai (Principal CIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), revising the Asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of revision proceedings under Section 263 of the Act has been dealt by this Court in Grasim Industries Ltd., v/s. CIT (321 ITR 92). In Grasim Industries (supra), the Court held that where two views are possible and the Income Tax Officer has taken one view with which the Commissioner does not agree, it cannot be treated as erroneous order prejudicial to the interest of Revenue unless the view tak....