ANNAPURNA DIBBUR GIRISH,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1) & TPS, HUBLI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) in the interest of natural justice, considering the large demand and the possibility of a genuine claim under the wrong section. The matter was remanded back to the AO for de-novo assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed deductions under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act for sale of properties. The Assessing Officer (AO) denied the claim, stating it should have been under Section 54F, and made an addition. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed as time-barred due to a significant delay.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal as time-barred, and whether claiming deduction under the wrong section is fatal to the claim.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI BALAKRISHNAN S & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY
per aforesaid directions after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are statistically allowed.
With respect to appeal in ITA No.2357/Bang/2025 arising out of the penalty order passed under section 270A of the Act, we find that since the quantum appeal is remanded back to the file of the learned AO, the penalty order does not have legs to stand and does not survive. Thus, the grounds raised in the penalty appeal are disposed off.
In the result, appeal in ITA No.2367/Bang/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes and appeal in ITA No.2857/Bang/2026 is dismissed.
Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.
Sd/- Sd/- (KESHAV DUBEY) (BALAKRISHNAN S) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore. Dated: 30.04.2026. /NS/*
Copy to: 1. Appellants 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. Guard file By order
Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore.
More judgments on Section 54
- Renu Arun Talwar, Mumbai vs Circle 17(1), MumbaiITA 204/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad vs Manan Arati Patel, AhmedabadITA 923/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Rohitbhai Jivrambhai Patel, Vadodara vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), VadodaraITA 679/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Rohitbhai Jivrambhai Patel, Vadodara vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), VadodaraITA 679/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Dy. Commissioner of Income… vs Thomas Myladiyil Augustine, AhmedabadITA 1131/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Ritik vs. State Of M.P.Madhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026