How many judgments cite CIT v. Kamal Wahal?

71 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Kamal Wahal (351 ITR 4), spanning 2016 to 2025.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 54F, Section 54, Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 147, Section 45.

CIT v. Kamal Wahal

351 ITR 4High Court2013#1607 most cited

What is CIT v. Kamal Wahal authority for?

An assessee is eligible for capital gains exemption under Sections 54 and 54F even when the new residential house is purchased in the name of their spouse, provided the investment comes from the assessee's own funds. This allows for a purposive construction of these provisions.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kamal Wahal · Kamal Wahal · Section 54 exemption · Section 54F exemption · capital gains exemption · new house in spouse name · purchase in wife name · investment from assessee funds · purposive construction · long term capital gain

Also reported as

30 Taxmann.com 34214 Taxmann 287

Sections most often in play

Section 54F Section 54 Section 143(3)Section 148 Section 147 Section 45 Section 139(1)Section 234A

Issues it is cited on

section 54(1)section 54b section 54f section 54 indexed cost of acquisition transfer of capital asset date of transfer section 45 long term capital gain section 50c section 50 long term capital gains

Judgments citing CIT v. Kamal Wahal

HANCHIPURA CHANNAIAH NANDAKISHORE,MAHALKSHMIPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD INTL, TAXATION 1(2) BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.258/Bang/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Hanchipura Channaiah Nandakishore 87, 2Nd Stage & Phase Mahalakshmipuram 2Nd Stage, 14Th Main, West Of Chord Ito Road Vs. Ward International Taxation 1(2) Mahalakshmipuram Bangalore Bangalore 560 086 Pan No :Blrpn0428A Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Siddesh N Gaddi, A.R. Respondent By : Dr. Divya K.J., D.R. Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2025

For Appellant: Sri Siddesh N Gaddi, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Divya K.J., D.R

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 54Section 54(2)Section 80T

…section 54F, new residential house need not be purchased by assessee in his own name or exclusively in his name. 13. Further, we find that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the cases of CIT v. Kamal Wahal [2013] 30 taxmann.com 34/214 Taxman 287/351 ITR 4 and CIT v. Ravinder Kumar Arora [2011] 15 IT(IT)A No.258/Bang/2025 HanchipuraChannaiah Nandakishore, Bangalore Page 14 of 16 taxmann.com 307/203 Taxman 289/[2012] 342 ITR 38, has held that new house purchased in the name of the spouse of the assessee was eligible for claiming deduction under section 54F. The provisions of section 54F are pari-mate…

SHRI INAMUL HAQ,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO, SAHARANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3300/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Inamul Haq S/O Sh. Mohd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Yamin, Vill.Megh Chhappar, Ward-2. Ambalaa Road, Saharanpur (U.P) Saharanpur Pan: Aaiph2840K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(4)

…ect of taxation within the corners of Income Tax Act. As regards the name under whom the property is purchased, it can be seen that the son of the assessee is a direct relation and as per the Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in case of CIT(A) Vs. Kamal Vahal 351 ITR 4 where assessee purchased new house in 6 ITA No. 2754/Del/2019 name of his wife, the claim under Section 54 is held valid. Thus, the exemption could not be denied if entire investment had come out of proceeds of old property. Thus, the order of the CIT(A) is not justified in light of the decision in case of Kamal Wahal (supra). Therefore, the appeal…

SH. RAJESH NARENDRABHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(2), VADODARA, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1592/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2012-13 Shri Rajesh Narendrabhai Patel Ito, Ward-1(2)(2) Baroda Bolt & Engineering Works Vadodara. Opp: Lalbaug Atitigruh Pratapnagar Vadodara Pan : Acqpp 6089 C (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : None : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: None

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C(2)Section 54Section 80C

…ere the investment in 8 the new residential property is made by the assessee from his own funds, the mere fact that the property is purchased in the name of the spouse does not disentitle the assessee from exemption. For instance, in CIT v. Kamal Wahal [2013] 351 ITR 4 (Del.), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that exemption under section 54F could not be denied merely because the house was purchased in the name of the assessee’s wife. Similar ratio has been adopted in CIT v. V. Natarajan [2006] 287 ITR 271 (Mad), and several other decisions of coordinate Benches. 5.4 Thus, while the principle of strict construc…

VITHIYA MURALI,NAGAPATTINAM vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KUMBAKONAM

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3333/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकरअपील सं./Ita Nos.3333/Chny/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vithiya Murali, Vs. Income Tax Officer, No.51, Subramaniyampuram, Ward-1, Mayiladuthurai, Nagapattinam Kumbakonam. Tamil Nadu-609 001. [Pan: Aohpv4251M]

For Appellant: Mr.Abhishek Murali, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘बी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यागयक सदस्य एवं माननीय श्री एस.आर.रघुनाथा ,लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपील सं./ITA Nos.3333/Chny/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vithiya Murali, Vs. Income Tax Officer, No.51, Subramaniyampuram, Ward-1, Mayiladuthurai, Nagapattinam Kumbakonam. Tamil Nadu-609 001. [PAN: AOHPV4251M] (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.Abhishek Murali, C.A. प…

JAGDISH PARSHAD JAIN,PANIPAT vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KARNAL, KARNAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3300/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(4)

ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. JAY BHARAT MEHTA, MUMBAI

ITA 1085/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri J. D. Mistry &For Respondent: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 54FSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai – 400020, Maharashtra. …………. Appellant Vs Jay Bharat Mehta 83B and C Sheth Govindrao Smruti BL, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Mumbai – 400018. Maharashtra. [PAN:AFCPM1890H] …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant /Department : Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram For the Respondent /Assessee : Shri J. D. Mistry & Ms. Arati Vissanji Date Conclusion of hearing : 16.10.2024 Pronouncement of order : 13.01.2025 O…

PHOOL SINGH,HARYANA vs. ITO WARD-3(2), GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1986/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarphool Singh Vs. Ito Plot No.2394 (Basement), Ward – 3(2) Sector – 46, Gurgaon Gurgaon, Haryana – 122 002 Pan : Eurps 4895 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Respondent By Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing 08.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.12.2024 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar, Jm:

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 54BSection 54F

…clusively by his son. In our view, a pure finding of fact has been recorded by the ITAT which does not require any interference in this appeal.”  Similar is position in Laxmi Naryan vs. CIT 402 ITR 117, High Court of Rajasthan,  CIT vs. Kamal Wahal, (2013) 351 ITR 4, High Court of Delhi,  CIT vs. Natarajan, (2006) 287 ITR 271, High Court of Madras,  CIT vs. Ravinder Kumar Arora, (2011) 52 sot 201, ITAT Delhi Bench and  Sh. Rajkumar Mandani vs. DCIT, ITA No. 835/Hyd/2018 dated 20.11.2018, ITAT Delhi Bench. 9.4 So, it is clear that assessee has purchased agricultural land and therefore, is eligible for deduc…

VIDJAYANE DURAIRAJ VIDJAYANE VELRADJOU,PUDUCHERRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, PUDUCHERRY, PUDUCHERRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1457/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. V. Meenakshi Sundar, CA

Section 148Section 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1457/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 v. Vidjayane Durairaj – The ITO, Vidjayane Velradjou, Ward-3, No.5, Vincent De Paul Street, Puducherry. Colas Nagar, Puducherry-605 001. [PAN: AGIPV 0802 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr. V. Meenakshi Sundar, CA : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by Mr. P. Kris…

VIVEK GANGADHAR MEHENDALE,SANTACRUZ, MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 22(3)(1),, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS,MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 2644/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: ShriAnil SatheFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, SRDR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54Section 54FSection 64(1)

…Bagga vs ACIT (2024) 158 taxmann.com 265 (Del Trib), where at paragraph 13 on page 4 of the order of the co-ordinate bench has held as under: - “13. Further, we find that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the cases of CIT vs. Kamal Wahal [2013] 351 ITR 4 (Delhi) and C IT vs. Ravinder Kumar Arora [2012] 342 ITR 38 (Delhi), has held that new house purchased in the name of the spouse of the assessee was eligible for claiming deduction under section 54F. T he provisions of section 54 F are pari-materia with the provisions of section 54 of the Act and thus , the principle derived equally applies to sect…

MR COLATHUR N. RAM ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 34(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of what we have observed hereinabove

ITA 1464/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI BR BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 54

…eduction under section 54F, new residential house need not be purchased by assessee in his own name or exclusively in his name. 13. Further, we find that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the cases of CIT vs. Kamal Wahal MANU/DE/0134/2013: [2013] 351 ITR 4 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Ravindes Kumar Arora MANU/DE/7363/2011: [2012] 342 ITR 38 (Delhi), has held that new house purchased in the name of the spouse of the assessee was eligible for claiming deduction under section 54F. The provisions of section 54F are pari-materia with the provisions of section 54 of the Act and thus, the principle derived equally…

INCOME AX OFFICER, WARD-6(1), PUNE vs. SAMBHAJI MARUTI KATKAR, PUNE

ITA 666/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 54F

…1 ITA.No.645, 666 & CO.No.19/PUN./2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.645, 666 & CO.No.19/PUN./2024 Assessment Year 2021-2022 Mr. Sambhaji Maruti The Income Tax Officer, Katkar, S.No.26/6, Ward – 6 (1), PMT Bldg., Singhad Road, Wadgaon Shankar Sheth Road, vs (Bk), PUNE - 411 051 Swargate, PUNE – 411 037. Maharashtra.PAN AEZPK8714Q Maharashtra. (Appellant/Cross Objector) (Respondent/Appellant) For Assessee : Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani For Revenue : Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT-DR Date of…

MR. SAMBHAJI MARUTI KATKAR,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 6(1), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 645/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 54F

ANIL BHARDWAJ,ZAMBIA vs. DCIT-ACIT-INT-TAX GURGAON, GURGAON

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1250/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 1250/Del/2024 (A.Y 2020-21) Anil Bhardwaj Dcit/Acit 5994, Benakale Road, P. O Vs. International Tax, Box No. 31776, Northmead, Office Of Acit-Dcit Int- Near Rhodes Park School, Tax, Gurgaon Lusaka-10101, Zambia, Ny (Respondent) Pan No. Anlpb2321F (Appellant)

For Appellant: Sh. Shailesh Kumar, CA

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 54Section 54F

…order to claim deduction under section 54F, new residential house need not be purchased by assessee in his own name or exclusively in his name . 13. Further, we find that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the cases of CIT vs. Kamal Wahal [2013] 351 ITR 4 (Delhi) and C IT vs. Ravinder Kumar Arora [2012] 342 ITR 38 (Delhi), has held that new house purchased in the name of the spouse of the assessee was eligible for claiming deduction under section 54F. The provisions of section 54 F are pari-materia with the provisions of section 54 of the Act and thus, the principle derived equally 13 Anil Bhardwaj…

SAKTI DASGUPTA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR. 7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 110/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.110/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 Sakti Dasgupta………..……………....................…...……………....Appellant Sakti Dasgupta Gd 277, Salt Lake, Kolkata – 700106. [Pan: Acrpd0675M] Vs. Acit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata.…………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 05, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 31, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 18.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Relating To The Quantum Of Deduction Allowable To The Assessee U/S 54F Of The Act On Account Of Purchase Of New Residential House.

Section 250Section 54BSection 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘सी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.110/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 Sakti Dasgupta………..……………....................…...……………....Appellant Sakti Dasgupta GD 277, Salt Lake, Kolkata – 700106. [PAN: ACRPD0675M] vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata.…………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate and Puja Somani, CA, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT- Sr. DR, appeared on behalf o…

SH. MANJIT SINGH BAIDWAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1308/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Nalin Nohria, CA and Shri B.K.Nohria, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 54Section 54BSection 54F

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No 1308/CHD/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Manjit Singh Baidwan, V The DCIT (International Taxation), House No. 3151, Sector 27-D, s Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAPPB3691P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by: Shri Nalin Nohria, CA and Shri B.K.Nohria, CA राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of He…

GENDALAL JADHAV,INDORE vs. ITO-1(1), INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 466/IND/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanigendalal Jadhav, Ito 1(1) 168-G Palakhedi, Gandhi Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Nagar Indore Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aphpj4675K Assessee By Shri Santosh Deshmukh, Ar Revenue By Shri Harshit Bari Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21.03.2024 O R D E R

Section 54B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Gendalal Jadhav, ITO 1(1) 168-G Palakhedi, Gandhi Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Nagar Indore Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: APHPJ4675K Assessee by Shri Santosh Deshmukh, AR Revenue by Shri Harshit Bari Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement 21.03.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM : This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 26.09.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Bhop…

GOPALKRISHNA PANDU SHETTY,MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA vs. ACIT CIRCLE 32(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI, MAHRASHTRA

ITA 2471/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish ShethFor Respondent: Shri Manish Ajudiya

Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

…the Appellant under Section 54 of the Act was that the new residential house property was in the name of the wife of the Appellant. It was submitted that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court had, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax – XII Vs. Kamal Wahal: [2013] 351 ITR 4 had allowed the claim of deduction under Section 54F of the Act in respect of a residential house property purchases of an assessee in the name of his wife. The aforesaid decision was followed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Bhagwan Swaroop Pathak Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(3), Gurgaon, Haryana : [ITA No. 2754/Del/2019, dated…

M/S SIDDHULA;L,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 2(2) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 110/IND/2023[2011-12d]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Siddhulal Patidar, Income-Tax Officer, 01,Gram Sallaiya, 2(2), बनाम/ Bawadia Kalan, Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Dhypp1740N Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28.02.2024

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 50C(1)Section 50C(2)Section 54B

…Bhopal ITA No. 110/Ind/2023 – AY 2011-12 registered in the name of assessee’s son or wife and still the courts have allowed exemption. The decisions relied by Ld. AR are: (a) PCIT Vs. Balmukund Meena ITA No. 188/2016 (MP High Court) (b) CIT Vs. Kamal Wahal 351 ITR 4 (2013) (Delhi High Court) (c) CIT Vs. V. Natarajan 154 Taxman 399 (Madras High Court) (d) Bhagwan Swaroop Pathak Vs. ITO, ITA No. 2754/Del/2019 (e) Mukkamala Srihari Rao Vs. ACIT 142 Taxman.com 479 (Ranchi) Ld. AR submitted that the first decision in above list i.e. PCIT Vs. Balmukund Meena ITA No. 188/2016 is a decision of Hon’ble jurisdictio…

SIMRAN BAGGA,DUBAI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE INT. TAXATION, 1(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1786/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Anshul Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 54

…In order to claim deduction under section 54F, new residential house need not be purchased by assessee in his own name or exclusively in his name. 13. Further, we find that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the cases of CIT vs. Kamal Wahal [2013] 351 ITR 4 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Ravinder Kumar Arora [2012] 342 ITR 38 (Delhi), has held that new house purchased in the name of the spouse of the assessee was eligible for claiming deduction under section 54F. The provisions of section 54F are pari-materia with the provisions of section 54 of the Act and thus, the principle derived equally applies to section…

RAJIV GHAI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE INT. TAX 1(3)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 9212/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Shray, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 234ASection 54

…e gone through the entire record before us and find that the ld. CIT(A) had diligently, meticulously & conscientiously, after considering the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court judgments in the case of ACIT Vs. Suresh Verma (135 ITD 102) & CIT Vs. Kamal Wahal (351 ITR 4) came to a valid conclusion that the investments have been made by the assessee from his bank account of Rs.17,65,000/- on 14.08.2014 and Rs.3,31,82,000/- dated 21.08.2014 for payment to Sh. V. Ravindran, seller of the property and the parents have gone to registration owing to the absence of the assessee in India. Further, it is also a fact that s…

Showing 1–20 of 71 · Page 1 of 4