Kishorbhai Harjibhai Patel v. ITO

107 Taxmann.com 295High Court2019#10881 most cited

What is Kishorbhai Harjibhai Patel v. ITO authority for?

An assessee is entitled to relief under Section 54F for the purchase of a new residential property if an agreement to sell the old property was executed and the new property was purchased within one year of that agreement, even if the sale deed for the old property was not executed within the prescribed time. Section 54F is a beneficial provision and should be interpreted liberally.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kishorbhai Harjibhai Patel v. ITO · Section 54F · Section 2(47) · agreement to sell · date of transfer · purchase of new residential property · beneficial provision · liberal interpretation · capital asset · Gujarat HC

Also reported as

417 ITR 547

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 54Section 54FSection 10AASection 10BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)

Issues it is cited on

section 54(1)section 2(47)section 54date of transfersection 54fsection 139transferprescribedsection 15section 25section 13section 250

Judgments citing Kishorbhai Harjibhai Patel v. ITO

Ranajit Suresh Rajamane, Solapur vs. ITO, Ward 1, Pandharpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1678/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1678/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ranajit Suresh Rajamane, Vs Ito Ward 1, Shukrawar Peth, Pandharpur Tembhurni Madha Solapur- 413211 Maharashtra Pan-Bmepr3878N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54Section 548Section 54BSection 54B(1)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "बी" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1678/PUN/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ranajit Suresh Rajamane, Vs ITO Ward 1, Shukrawar Peth, Pandharpur Tembhurni Madha Solapur- 413211 Maharashtra PAN-BMEPR3878N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue by : Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 13.01.2026 Date of pronouncement : 27.01.2026 आदेश/ORDER PER DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal at the…

Poonam Dhananjay Sandu, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

ITA 2050/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Girish Agrawal, ()

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 270A(3)Section 270A(9)Section 54

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.2050/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Poonam Vs ITO, Ward -27(2)(1) DhananjaySandu Vashi Rly StnBldg, 7th Road, SanduWadi, Navi Mumbai Chembur PAN: AAPQPS7175D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Mr. Viraj Mehta Respondent by Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeal filed by the assesseechallenging the impugned orders dated 27.01.2025 pass…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Meerut vs. Prem Sapra, New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1739/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 143(3)Section 54

…nder Section 54 of the Act in respect of the long term capital gain which they had earned in pursuance of transfer of their residential property being House No. 267, Sector 9-C, situated in Chandigarh and used for purchase of a new asset/residential house". ➤ 417 ITR 547, KishorbhaiHarjibhai Patel vs. ITO (Gujarat H.C.) in which the above cited SC judgment in Sanjeev Lal has been followed. ➤ 254 ITR 22, Balraj vs. CIT (Delhi HC). Relevant findings of the High Court are reproduced at page 16 of PB and also reproduced below: "The Assessing Officer, the appellate authority as well as the Tribunal rejected the claim…

Arvindbhai Ramniklal Raval HUF, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(6), Surat

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 19/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.19/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Arvindbhai Ramniklal Raval Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ (Huf)308, Chhapania Street, 1(3)(6), Surat, Room No.303, 3Rd Vs. Adajan, Surat-395 009 Floor, Income Tax Office, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan Hazira Road, Adajan, Surat-395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaeha 1847 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 250Section 54F

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.19/SRT/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical court hearing) Arvindbhai Ramniklal Raval Income Tax Officer, Ward- बनाम/ (HUF)308, Chhapania Street, 1(3)(6), Surat, Room No.303, 3rd Vs. Adajan, Surat-395 009 Floor, Income Tax Office, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan Hazira Road, Adajan, Surat-395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAEHA 1847 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant by Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, CA राज" की…

Fortrea Scientific Private Limited, Pune vs. ACIT, Mumbai

ITA 5701/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari &For Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 10A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “F” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 5678/Mum/2024 5701/Mum/2024 Α.Υ. 2016-17 2016-17 Appellant Fortrea Scientific Private Limited, Qubix Business Park Private Limited, Blue Ridge, IT6, 1st Floor, S.No. 154/6, Near Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjewadi Ph1, Pune Man, Wakad B.O., Pune PAN: AAKCS7755B Respondent Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(2)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai. For Assessee : Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Shri Pranay Gandhi For Revenue : Shri Paresh Deshpand…

Fortrea Scientific Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 11(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5678/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2024AY 2016-17
Section 10A

…2 ITA No. 5678/Mum/24 & ITA No. 5701/Mum/24 appeal in ITA ITA No. 5701/Mum/2024 is a duplicate appeal and the same may be dismissed as infructuous. Accordingly, the No. 5701/Mum/2024 is dismissed as infructuous. ITA No. 5678/Mum/2024: 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 02-09-2024 passed by Ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and it relates to the assessment year 2016-17. The main issue contested in this appeal relates to denial of deduction claimed u/s. 10AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act') for the reason that Form 56F was not filed along with return of income of the assessee. 3. The Ld A.R submitted th…

Shri Dilip Manibhai Prajapati, Dholka vs. The ITO, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 179/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Dilip Manibhai Prajapati Vs. The Ito, Ward-3(2)(1) 1, Shitalnath Society Ahmedabad. Opp: Aath Gam Patel Wadi, Saroda Road Kalikund Dhoka 382 225 Pan : Acspp 9801 C

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, AR, and Shri Samir Vora, AR
Section 250Section 56(2)(x)

…ere to be fulfilled by the user of the land, subject to which the land would be treated as non-agriculture land. He drew our attention to the judgement of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kishorbhai Harjibhai Patel vs Income Tax Officer (2014) 417 ITR 547 pointing out therefrom that the Hon’ble Court had categorically stated that when permission is granted by authorities concerned for sale of agricultural land to non-agriculturist, the land does not cease to be agricultural land merely because of such permission being granted; that if the conditions of the permission are not complied with, the lan…

Maheswari Mining & Energy Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1220/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Years: 2016-17 Maheswari Mining & Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Energy Pvt. Ltd., Income-Tax, Hyderabad. Circle – 16(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Aagcm0805N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Y. Ratnamkar& B. Satyanarayana Murthy Revenue By: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai Date Of Hearing: 21/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: /04/2022

For Appellant: S/Shri Y. Ratnamkar&For Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32A

…that the will of the law maker should be understood by their intentions when section 32AD was put on the statute book. 18) Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of KishorebhaiHarjibhai Patel v. Income Tax Officer reported in 417 ITR 547, he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision at para 575 has observed as under: “It is now a well-established principle of law that whereas eligibility criteria laid down in an exemption notification are required to be construed strictly, once it is found that the applicant satisfied the same, the exemption notification should…

True Sparrow Sysytem Pvt. Ltd, Vadodara vs. The Pr. CIT-2, Vadodara

In the result, we hold that the Ld

ITA 765/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Apr 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Tuhsar Hemani, Sr. A.R. with Shri Anil R. Shah, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal, CIT-D.R
Section 10ASection 10BSection 263Section 56F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2013-14 True Sparrow Systems Pr. Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd. Kothipole, Income-tax, Vadodara-2, 2nd Floor, Aayakar Raopura, Vs Vadodara-390001 Bhavan, Race Course PAN: AACCT7101J Circle, Vadodara-390001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Tuhsar Hemani, Sr. A.R. with Shri Anil R. Shah, C.A. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Advocate Revenue by: Shri Samir Tekriwal, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 23-02-2022 Da…

ACIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Niranjan Bhadang, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5566/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri D. Nishant Thakkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Soni, D.R
Section 54F

…eas the assessee’s counsel in addition to supporting the findings of CIT(A) on the basis of the decisions relied upon by the CIT(A) also placed reliance on a recent decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kishorebhai Harjibhai Patel vs. ITO (417 ITR 547) which, after following the decision of the Apex Court in Sanjeev Lal (supra) and after considering the decisions several other High Courts across the country including the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Girish Ragha (239 Taxman 449), held that the date of transfer for the purposes of section 54F was the date of the agreement of…