← All Phrases

“Section 55(2)(a)”

Section References (mined)Section 55Section 55(2)(a)49 judgments

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. UNICORN PACKAGING LLP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is, accordingly, stands dismissed

ITA 898/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)(c)Section 49(1)(iii)Section 55(2)(a)

section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1) and/or Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) which established that Depreciation cannot be claimed on goodwill arising out of amalgamation under the existing provision of the Income ... section 32(1), section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1), Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) to hold that no depreciation could be allowed on goodwill arising in a tax-neutral amalgamation on the footing that there

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. UNICORN PACKAGING LLP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is, accordingly, stands dismissed

ITA 897/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)(c)Section 49(1)(iii)Section 55(2)(a)

section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1) and/or Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) which established that Depreciation cannot be claimed on goodwill arising out of amalgamation under the existing provision of the Income ... section 32(1), section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1), Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) to hold that no depreciation could be allowed on goodwill arising in a tax-neutral amalgamation on the footing that there

ACIT CC-1(3), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. UNICORN PACKAGING LLP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is, accordingly, stands dismissed

ITA 896/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)(c)Section 49(1)(iii)Section 55(2)(a)

section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1) and/or Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) which established that Depreciation cannot be claimed on goodwill arising out of amalgamation under the existing provision of the Income ... section 32(1), section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1), Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) to hold that no depreciation could be allowed on goodwill arising in a tax-neutral amalgamation on the footing that there

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. UNICORN PACKAGING PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is, accordingly, stands dismissed

ITA 895/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)(c)Section 49(1)(iii)Section 55(2)(a)

section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1) and/or Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) which established that Depreciation cannot be claimed on goodwill arising out of amalgamation under the existing provision of the Income ... section 32(1), section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1), Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) to hold that no depreciation could be allowed on goodwill arising in a tax-neutral amalgamation on the footing that there

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. UNICORN PACKAGING LLP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is, accordingly, stands dismissed

ITA 894/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)(c)Section 49(1)(iii)Section 55(2)(a)

section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1) and/or Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) which established that Depreciation cannot be claimed on goodwill arising out of amalgamation under the existing provision of the Income ... section 32(1), section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1), Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) to hold that no depreciation could be allowed on goodwill arising in a tax-neutral amalgamation on the footing that there

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD vs. UNICORN PACKAGING LLP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is, accordingly, stands dismissed

ITA 893/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)(c)Section 49(1)(iii)Section 55(2)(a)

section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1) and/or Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) which established that Depreciation cannot be claimed on goodwill arising out of amalgamation under the existing provision of the Income ... section 32(1), section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1), Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) to hold that no depreciation could be allowed on goodwill arising in a tax-neutral amalgamation on the footing that there

RAVI SHROFF,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 25(3), MUMBAI, BANDRA (EAST), MUMBAI

In the result, all remaining ground are allowed with the aforesaid directions

ITA 4186/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 254(1)Section 28Section 28(1)

right by agreeing to non complete clauses contained in agreement, then the same ought to be computed as per the provision of section 55(2)(a) of the Act. The provision of section 28(va) is attracted only where a person was carried on business and not merely person only

DOSTI REALTY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 6129/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

Further, in case of goodwill arising out of amalgamation, the cost in the hands of target company would be NIL by virtue of section 55(2) (a) (ii) and, accordingly, the cost would be NIL in the hands of acquirer-company. It is pertinent to note that decisions favouring ... section 49(1)(iii)(e), Explanation 7 to section 43(1)and/or Explanation 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) were not referred.. 8. Generally, when someone acquires a business and purchase consideration paid for the business is more than the net assets

RAMESH JAISINGHANI,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 980/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 50(2)(ec)Section 55(2)(aa)Section 55(2)(ac)Section 55(2)(as)Section 56(2)(ac)

shares held in Polycab Ltd, offered under "offer for sale at the time of initial Public Offering (IPO); Provisions of Explanation to section 55(2)(ac) of the Act as applicable at the time when the Impugned OFS transactions was entered into should be applied. 2. failed to appreciate ... existing at the time of the transaction, the computation mechanism in relation to determination of cost of shares offered under OFS as per section 55(2)(ac) of the Act fails, by virtue of which the capital gains cannot be computed and hence there can be no levy of capital

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -16(1), MUMBAI vs. EAGLE FIMS, MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds of

ITA 3204/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt.Renu Jauhri(Physical Hearing)

Section 2(14)Section 254(1)Section 55(2)(a)

film rights were capital asset as defined in section2(14) of the Act. The film rights were intangible assets within the meaning of section 55(2)(a) of the Act. Such rights were received by closure. The assessee was holding exclusive copyright on all these films. On sale of such

SAGARLAXMI AGRISEEDS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1918/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year : 2017-18 Sagarlaxmi Agriseeds Pvt Ltd Acit, Cir.4(1)(1) 206, Ashwamegh Avenue Vs Ahmedabad. Opp: Mithakhali Garden Navrangpura Ahmedabad. Pan : Aawcs 7561 F (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee By : Shri Deepak R. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dharnidas V.S., Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dharnidas V.S., Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32

rate. He, further, referring to the 6th proviso to section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act, ( in short, “the Act”) read with section 55(2)(a)(ii) of the Act, observed that before it’s succession to the assessee- company, the amount of goodwill in the books

BHARAT AMRATLAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CIRCLE 4(1)(1), AAYAKAR BHAWAN

ITA 134/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Bharat Amratlal Shah Dcit, Circle 4(1)(1) I-E, Wing B, 1St Floor Aayakar Bhavan Kakad House, 11-New Vs. M.K. Road Marine Lines, Opp. Churchgage Bombay Hospital Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 020. Pan : Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali AafaquiFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 49Section 54ESection 55Section 55(2)(a)

ABOVE 2. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Authority has erred in invoking Section 55(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for determination of Cost of Acquisition of tenancy right and the reasons assigned for doing ... made an addition of Rs. 25 lakh stating that the appellant has not purchased any tenancy rights from previous owner. Section 55(2)(a) of the I.T. Act is reproduced below :- Section 55 - Meaning of “adjusted", "cost of improvement" and "cost of acquisition” Section 55 (2)(a) For the purposes

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. MCFILLS ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No. 401/Ahd/2022 is partly allowed and ITA 402/Ahd/2022 is dismissed

ITA 402/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 401 & 402/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(18)Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)

amalgamation specially section 2(1B), sixth proviso to section 32(1), section 49(1)(iii)(e) explanation 2 to section 43(6) and section 55(2). 6. Whether the ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts holding that department has not objected during the proceedings before the NCLT ... Explanation I.T.A Nos. 401 & 402/Ahd/2022 McFills Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., A.Y. 2017-18 & 2018-19 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) of the Act to the present case. The ld. D.R. relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in case of United Brewery

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. MCFILLS ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No. 401/Ahd/2022 is partly allowed and ITA 402/Ahd/2022 is dismissed

ITA 401/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 401 & 402/Ahd/2022 Assessment Year 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(18)Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)

amalgamation specially section 2(1B), sixth proviso to section 32(1), section 49(1)(iii)(e) explanation 2 to section 43(6) and section 55(2). 6. Whether the ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts holding that department has not objected during the proceedings before the NCLT ... Explanation I.T.A Nos. 401 & 402/Ahd/2022 McFills Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., A.Y. 2017-18 & 2018-19 2(b) to section 43(6)(c) and section 55(2)(a)(ii) of the Act to the present case. The ld. D.R. relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in case of United Brewery

REXEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

ITA 981/PUN/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 May 2025
Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)

present\ncase.\n25. As regards the reliance placed by the Revenue on the provisions of\nSection 49(1)(iii)(e) and Section 55(2)(a)(ii) of the Act, it is pertinent to\nnote that these provisions form part of the Chapter dealing with\n\"Capital Gains\" and Section

THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(12),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI CAWAS DARASHA KARAKA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 499/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT\nMS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nI.T.A. No. 499/Ahd/2018\n(Assessment Year: 2013-14)\nIncome-Tax Officer,\nWard-3(3)(12),\nAhmedabad\n(Appellant)\nVs.\nLate Shri Cawas Darasha\nKaraka, Legal Heir M/s.\nCawas Karaka Trust,\n22, Teen Murti Bungalows,\nNr. Devang Bungalows,\nThaltej, Ahmedabad-380054\n[PAN : AGSPK 9616 L]\n(Respondent)\nAppellant by :\nShri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &\nShri Parimalsinh H. Parmar, ARs\nRespondent by:\nAdjournment applica

For Appellant: \nShri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: \nAdjournment application filed
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 48Section 49(1)Section 55(2)(a)Section 69A

nquestion of the assessee has to be determined in accordance with the\nprovision of section 48 of the Act if not, under section 55(2)(a) of the act\nand in accordance to the well-established principle for valuation of fair\nmarket value\" of such lease hold rights ... nthe assessee as per the terms and conditions of the registered lease deed of\n1932 and therefore in accordance with the provision of section 55(2)(a)(ii)\nof the Act, the cost of acquisition has to be taken at NIL.\n2. In para 3.3 (page

SANTOSH MOHAN PATOLE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 34(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5810/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

Section 144Section 148Section 250

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No.5810/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2013

SHAHNAJ,NEAR BHERUDANJI WELL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 712/JODH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Dr Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Shanaj Vs The Ito W/O Shri Aslam Khan Ward-2, Churu, Near Bherudan Ji Well,Ward No. 22 Churu Sardarshahar,Churu – 331 403 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Fpmps 3570 D

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 50CSection 54F

capital receipts leading to taxable capital gains, is very important for two reasons ~ first, that the cost of acquisition for tenancy rights, under section 55(2)(a), is, unless purchased from a previous owner ~ which is admittedly not the case here, treated as ‘nil’; and, - second, since the Provisions

DOW CHEMICAL INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED,THANE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 3772/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. AR /
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

DOW CHEMICALS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA-14(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1200/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. AR /
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

Showing 1–20 of 49 · Page 1 of 3

Section 55(2)(a) — 49 judgments | BharatTax | BharatTax