SHRI INAMUL HAQ,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO, SAHARANPUR

ITA 3300/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 October 2025AY 2009-1012 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not allowing exemption under Section 54F for investments made in the name of the assessee's son. The Tribunal relied on judicial precedents stating that the new residential house need not be purchased exclusively in the assessee's name, provided the investment comes from sale proceeds.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a pensioner, sold an immovable property and did not offer capital gains in his return. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings and made additions. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the assessee's appeal, restricting the exemption under Section 54F.

What were the issues?

Whether exemption under Section 54F can be denied for investments made in the name of a son, and whether reassessment proceedings initiated by a non-jurisdictional officer are valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54F,Section 50C,Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 250(6),Section 139(4),Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(5)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, DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI M BALAGANESH & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12.08.2025Pronounced: 10.10.2025

PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

The appeal filed by assessee is against order dated 29.03.2016 of Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-, Muzaffarnagar (hereinafter referred as “the Ld. CIT(A)”) under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( hereinafter referred as “the Act”) arising out of assessment order dated 17.03.2015 of the Learned Assessing Officer/The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Saharanpur (hereinafter referred as “Ld. AO") under Sections 147/143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2009-10. 2. Brief facts of case are that assessee is a Pensioner of the Government Department. The assessee filed his return of income at Rs.1,21,546/- on 30.07.2009. Later on, it was noticed that

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 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →