RAJENDRA KUMAR GARG,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD (4)2, JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the deduction under Section 54F cannot be denied based on the nature of the plot or construction, and Section 50C's value cannot be imported into Section 54F calculations. The case was found to be covered by a previous co-ordinate bench decision.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed capital gains exemption on the sale of agricultural land. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated the land as a capital asset, applied Section 50C, and denied exemption under Section 54F, stating the new construction was a godown. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order.
What were the issues?
Whether agricultural land outside municipal limits is a capital asset, applicability of Section 50C to Section 54F calculations, and eligibility for deduction under Section 54F for investment in a new asset.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 2(14),Section 50C,Section 54F,Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 234B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, JAIPUR
Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Prakash
PER : PRAKASH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as “the learned CIT(A)”] dated 28.07.2025 passed under section 250 of the In- come Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) arising out of the reassessment order dated 26.12.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as "the AO") under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee before us in the memoran- dum of appeal in Form No. 36 read as under:
I.T.A No. 1209/JPR/2025 Page No 2 Rajendra Kumar Garg
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.
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 2(14)
- Karan Dilipkumar Patel L/H of Late… vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi…ITA 353/SRT/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Jagdishbhai Vasharambhai Italiya, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 150/AHD/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ishvarbhai Bhagabhai Patel, Surat vs The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), SuratITA 6/SRT/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Malini Satish Parekh, Surat vs ITO, Ward 2(3), SuratITA 900/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Lakhmanbhai Maru, Vadodara vs ITO, Ward 1(2)(1), Vadodara, Aayakar…ITA 1046/AHD/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2024-25
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026