“cost inflation index”

Capital GainsSection 48Section 4872 judgments

The decision most relied on for cost inflation index is CIT v. Manjula J. Shah (355 ITR 474), cited in 113 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on cost inflation index

CIT v. Manjula J. Shah

355 ITR 474 · 2013 · High Court

113

citing judgments

For capital assets acquired by gift or will, the indexed cost of acquisition under Section 48 is computed with reference to the year the previous owner first held the asset. The period of holding for determining if an asset is long-term also includes the previous owner's holding period, as per Section 2(42A).

Judgments citing cost inflation index

Precision Component Hightech Ltd, Nagpur vs. ACIT Central Circle 2(2), Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as above for all the seven years

ITA 94/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234B

estimated profitability statement is held to be constant for seven years ignoring inflation. Then why for purpose of computing long term capital gain cost inflation index changes every year as enshrined in section 48 of the Act. The Satisfaction Note drawn on a combined basis without any specific reference

Precision Component Hightech Ltd., Nagpur vs. ACIT Central Circle 2(2), Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as above for all the seven years

ITA 93/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234B

Precision Component Hightech Ltd, Nagpur vs. ACIT Central Circle 2(2), Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as above for all the seven years

ITA 92/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234B

Precision Component Hightech Ltd., Nagpur vs. ACIT Central Circle 2(2), Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as above for all the seven years

ITA 91/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234B

Manick Chandra Paul, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 614/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chandan Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 250Section 55ASection 80

Explanation thereof “indexed cost of acquisition” means an amount which bears to the cost of acquisition the same proportion as Cost Inflation Index for the year in which the asset is transferred bears to the Cost Inflation Index for the first year in which the asset was held

Ajay Bhagwati Chauhan, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 752/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav KabraFor Respondent: Shri Sunny Kachhwaha

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

addition can be made in the present case, as it has purchased the flat @ Rs.29,310 per sq.ft as compared to the cost inflation indexed rate of Rs.28,975/- during the year, in view of directions of the Tribunal in M/s. Nish Developers Pvt. Ltd. 9. We have considered

Purvi Vasantrai Mehta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed as being barred by limitation

ITA 4360/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: The Tribunal After A Delay Of 2420 Days. In The Application Seeking Condonation Of Delay It Has Been Stated As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Kiran MehtaFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

long delay may be explained as under: a. In the quantum appeal before the Hon CIT(A) the issues were: i. Allowability of cost inflation index with reference to the date of acquisition of earlier owner (i.e Appellant's mother). ii. Exemption u/s 54 qua the long term capital gains

Brij Bhushan Gupta, Haryana vs. DCIT, Int. Taxation, Gurgoan

In the result, the issue stands remitted to the file of the AO for

ITA 2218/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Sabarwal, Adv. and Shri Rajan Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT- DR

Section 120Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234A

HUDA, for which the final amount paid by the appellant comes to Rs. 85,30,735/- on which the appellant has claimed cost inflation index on its schedule payments thereof and on the stamp duty and registration charges paid subsequently of Rs. 4,80,500/- to HUDA at the time

A.S. Carriers Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1564/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1564/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 V. M/S.A.S.Carriers Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner- New No.173, Old No.103, 9Th Floor, Of Income Tax, B-Block, Navins Presidium, Corporate Circle-1(1), Nelson Manickam Road, Chennai. Aminjikarai, Chennai-600 029. [Pan: Aaacc 3136 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.Quadir HoseynFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 250Section 264

Rs.18,25,00,000/- respectively and also furnished computation of capital gains in which it claimed “index cost” as acquisition cost considering the cost inflation index of the properties and the assessee has also claimed cost of constructions, development/improvement on said lands in different years and accordingly, worked ... acquisition index cost considering the cost inflation index according to the year of construction/development/improvement of the concerned year. The AO therefore asked assessee for some more details along with supporting documents. The AO acknowledges that the assessee filed reply including relevant documents viz copy of Purchase Deed/sale deed of lands

Sukhpal Singh Ahluwalia, Mumbai vs. ITO (International Taxation) Ward 1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4139/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm Income Tax Officer Sukhpal Singh Ahluwalia (International Tax) Ward 6/24, Milan Building, 1(1)(1), 87, Tardeo Road, Room No.1817A, 18 Th Vs. Opp. Tardeo A C Market, Floor, Air India Building, Mumbai-400 034 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Azupa6884D Assessee By : Shri Rashmikant C. Modi & Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke, Ars Revenue By : Shri Soumendu Kumar Sash, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.04.2024 27.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant C. Modi &For Respondent: Shri Soumendu Kumar Sash, DR

Section 112Section 115CSection 143Section 144C(5)Section 254Section 45Section 48Section 74

section 48 of the Act , thus, u/s 112 assessee is not entitled to the benefit of indexation. Assessee has claimed benefit of cost inflation index while computing capital gain, which is not allowable. Sukhpal Singh Ahluwalia; A.Y. 2019-20 ii. Long term capital loss carried forward by the assessee from

Pulparambil Rajendran by Legal Heir P.R Anuradha, Calicut vs. ACIT Circle -1(1) &Tps, Kozhikode

In the result, the assessee’sappeal is dismissed

ITA 936/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. Seethalakshmi

For Appellant: None (written submissions)For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 2

independent variable, to be determined on the basis of the value of the capital asset as on 01.04.1981. The index, being a cost inflation index (CIF), only seeks to adjust the value, over time, on account of inflation. The FMV as on the value date, which is being reverse indexed ... this section,— (i) .. Gi); (iii) "indexed cost of acquisition" means an amount which bears to the cost of acquisition the same proportion as Cost Inflation Index for the year in which the asset is transferred bears to the Cost Inflation Index for the first year in which the asset

Sushila Bhardwaj, Jaipur vs. ITO 1(4), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 604/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Khandelwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 54

Explanation. As per this definition indexed cost of acquisition is an amount which bears to the cost of acquisition the same proportion as Cost Inflation Index for the year in which the asset is transferred bears to the Cost Inflation Index for the first year in which the asset

Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT -2(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 738/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Icici Bank Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of Icici Bank Towers, Income-Tax 2(3)(1) Bandra Kurla Complex, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. 5Th Floor, Room No.552, Badra (East), Mumbai-400 051 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaci1195H

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Visanji, advFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 263Section 36(1)Section 48

Appellant whilst working the long-term capital loss of Rs.996,75,31,387 on reduction/redemption of investments in its subsidiaries, applied the cost inflation index to the cost in foreign currency, which is erroneous as the cost inflation index is with reference to Indian Currency and to be computed with ... loss of Rs.759,14,40,116 on reduction/redemption of investments of its subsidiaries ICICI Bank Canada and ICICI Bank UK Plc, applied the cost inflation index to the cost in foreign currency which has which has resulted in an alleged excess allowance of Rs.502

ACIT, Centrl Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Anu Bajaj, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1943/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshacit, Vs. Anu Bajaj, Central Circle, House No. 21, Ghaziabad Sector-5, Raj Kumar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aekpb5893G Co No. 83/Del/2023 (In Ita No. 1943/Del/2023) (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Anu Bajaj, Vs. Acit, House No. 21, Central Circle, Sector-5, Raj Kumar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aekpb5893G Assessee By : Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv Shri Shrey Jain, Adv Revenue By: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2024

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT DR

Section 127Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

books; went wrong in treating the date of sale deed as date of purchase and recalculating the long term capital gain taking the cost inflation index of A.Y. 2008-09. The appellant submits that the consequent addition of Rs. 6, 16,730/- is erroneous and hence the same deserves

Gurdip Singh Kapur Legal Heir Smt.Nirmal Kapur, New Delhi vs. ACIT, International Taxation Circle -2(1)(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2616/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-Assessment Year: 2017-18 Late Gurdip Singh Kapur, Versus Acit, Circle 2(1)(2), Through Legal Heir-Smt. Nirmal International Taxation, Kapur, D-6/8, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Cygpp2489G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Rajesh Mahna, Adv. & Sh. Vikram Kakkar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr

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

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

value of cost of construction of the flat and adopted the sale consideration received at Rs.1,67,44,554/-. After allowing benefit towards cost inflation index, he determined the net long-term capital gain at Rs.43,27,032/-. As regards assessee’s claim of deduction under section

Bushra Javed, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Taxation 2(1)(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2003/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2018-19 Bushra Javed, Vs. Acit, D-112, Circle Int. Taxation 2 Lower Ground Floor, (1)(1) Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi. New Delhi-110 017 Pan Afgpj3907C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vizay Vasanta, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 48

observed from the assessment order that the Ld. AO negatived the assessee’s claim of indexation of cost of acquisition taking the Cost Inflation Index (CII) of 2003-04 for the reason that the property was registered in the name of her husband only and that the assessee became half

Shri Bhawani Shankar Parashar, Indore vs. The DCIT/ACIT 1 (2), Indore

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 411/IND/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Bhawani Shankar Pr. Cit-1 Prashar Indore 28, Lasudia Mori, Vijay Vs. Nagar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bgbpp 2475 G Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

Section 263

ITAT'S Sale consideration Rs. 10,48,09,000/- Less: 25% which is deducted while Rs.2,62,02,250/- preparing Notified cost inflation index Amount equivalent 582 of cost index Rs.7,86,06,750/- If 785 of Cil is Rs.7,86,06,750/- Then for 100 it will be Rs.7

Shri Gurkha Singh Alias Joginder Singh, Bathinda vs. Income Tax Offier Ward 1(1), Bathinda

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

ITA 145/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.145/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 54BSection 64Section 69A

question withdrawn from saving bank account of my father which was produced before him. The learned AO should have also allowed the cost inflation index of this improvement. The learned AO should I.T.A. No.145/Asr/2018 7 Assessment Year: 2009-10 have considered the old period of 28 years before rejecting

Dilip Singh Yadav, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 385/JPR/2022[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2023AY 2020-2021

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

hereby submit that similar wordings have been issued in Section 48, the relevant extract of which are mentioned hereunder: 3[(v) ―Cost Inflation Index", in relation to a previous year, means such Index as the Central Government may, having regard to seventy-five per cent of average rise

Upaid Systems Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 3(1)(2), Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3460/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: FixedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 9(1)(vi)

eliminate extreme tendencies cost to and limits. The selection of consumer price index i n f l a t i o n and cost inflation index tends to find a regular e s p e c i a l l y median which is free from wide fluctuations and considering