POONAM DHANANJAY SANDU,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 2050/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 November 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ( (Accountant Member)24 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the date of the agreement for sale, when it creates a legally enforceable right and is accompanied by substantial advance consideration, constitutes the date of transfer under Section 2(47) of the Act. Therefore, the assessee was eligible for the deduction under Section 54.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 54 for the purchase of a new residential property. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) denied this deduction, considering the date of registration of the sale deed as the date of transfer, not the date of the agreement for sale. The assessee argued that the agreement for sale, being legally enforceable and accompanied by substantial advance payment, constituted the date of transfer as per Section 2(47).

What were the issues?

Whether the date of agreement for sale, rather than the date of registration, should be considered the date of transfer for the purpose of Section 54 deduction. Whether an agreement for sale with substantial advance payment creates a legally enforceable right constituting a transfer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54,Section 2(47)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(9)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Appellant: Mr. Viraj Mehta
For Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DR
Hearing: 29.09.2025Pronounced: 26.11.2025

Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.:

The present appeal filed by the assesseechallenging the impugned orders dated 27.01.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

Ground No. 1: Denial of Deduction Under Section 54 a. The Learned Assessing Officer (AO) erred in disallowing the deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the grounds that the conditions of Section 54 were not satisfied. b. The Learned AO failed to consider the submissions made by the Assessee.

2 Poonam Dhananjay Sandu, Mumbai.

c. The Commissioner of

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 54

All 1,745 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →