HIMASAGAR KRISHNA MUTHAPPAGARI,TIRUPATI vs. ITO., WARD-2(3), TIRUPATI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the unregistered agreement to purchase, without registration as per the amended Registration Act, 1908, did not entitle the assessee to the exemption under Section 54F. The Pr. CIT's order under Section 263 was found to be justified.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed exemption under Section 54F for purchasing a residential property. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed reassessment accepting the original assessment. The Principal Commissioner (Pr. CIT) invoked Section 263, finding the AO's verification of the exemption claim inadequate due to an unregistered agreement to purchase.
What were the issues?
Whether the Pr. CIT was justified in revising the reassessment order for inadequate verification of Section 54F exemption claim, and whether an unregistered agreement to purchase can be considered for exemption.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 263,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 54F,Section 2(47)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad
आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Himasagar Krishna Muthappagari, Tirupati, 19-7-125/A, Flat No.202, Krishna Apartment, Gopalraju Colony, R.C. Road, Tirupati - 517501, Andhra Pradesh. 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Tirupati 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Tirupati 4. नवभधगीयप्रनतनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण, हैदरधबधद / DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 5. गधर्ाफ़धईल / Guard file
आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Hyderabad
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S South INDIA Trading Company vs. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North & Anr.Delhi · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Rishi Stonex vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OthersGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- Gopal Datt vs. Vishal Kumar SharmaUttarakhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Do Nam Enterprise And Anr vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 OrsGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- M Sundaravel vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central GST And Central ExciseMadras · 13 Oct 2026