How many judgments cite Balraj v. CIT?

42 judgments on BharatTax cite Balraj v. CIT (254 ITR 22), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Balraj v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 54, Section 54F, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 2(47).

Balraj v. CIT

254 ITR 22High Court2002#2828 most cited

What is Balraj v. CIT authority for?

For claiming capital gains exemption under sections 54 and 54F, it is not mandatory for the assessee to obtain a registered sale deed; mere investment in the new property and taking possession suffice.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Balraj v. CIT · 254 ITR 22 · Section 54 exemption · Section 54F exemption · registered deed · ownership of property · capital gains relief · Section 17 Registration Act · investment in new property · possession of property · Delhi High Court

Also reported as

123 Taxmann 290

Sections most often in play

Section 54 Section 54F Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 2(47)Section 142(1)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 54(1)section 53a section 53 section 54f section 2(47)section 54 inadequate enquiry date of transfer section 54b section 17 lack of enquiry section 263(1)

Judgments citing Balraj v. CIT

ACIT, Rewari vs. Sh. Rajender Singh Yadav, Gurgaon

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4169/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddyay : - 2008-09 Acit, Circle: Rewari Vs. Sh. Rajender Singh Yadav Aayakar Bhawan, Model Town 158, Housing Board Colony Rewari Jharsa Road, Gurgaon Pan: Aabpy 9819 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Vikram Sahay, Sr.D.R. Respondent By: Sh. Gautam Jain, C.A.

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Sahay, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Jain, C.A

Section 54F

…act is that the cheque was presented and got encashed. Once payment is made and possession of the property is received, there is transfer. He relied on the following case laws. i. CIT vs. RL Sood reported in 245 ITR 127 (Del.) ii. Balraj vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 22 (Del.) iii. Once the plot has been purchased on or before the due date of filing of the return of income, the investment so made is eligible for deduction u/s 54F of the Act. iv. That the section is a beneficial provision to encourage assesses to invest in house properties and keeping in view the object, the technical objections of the Ld.Sr.D.R.…

Commissioner of Income Tax –V vs. Kapil Nagpal

ITA/609/2014HC Delhi11 Sept 2015

Section 143Section 260Section 271Section 54Section 54F

…he exemption under Section 54F could be availed of by the Assessee, it requires to be first noticed that in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Podar Cements (P) Limited (supra), CIT v. T.N. Aravinda Reddy (supra) and Balraj v. CIT (2002) 254 ITR 22 (Del), in order to constitute purchase for the purpose of Section 54 and Section 54F of the Act it is not necessary that there should be registered sale deed. This Court in Balraj v. CIT (supra) noticed the decisions in Mysore Minerals Ltd. v. CIT (1999) 239 ITR 775 (SC) and CIT v. R.L. Sood (2000) 245 ITR 727 (Del) and held that “for the purp…