“section 54F exemption”

Capital GainsSection 54FSection 54F5 judgments

ITO 19.3.1, MUMBAI vs. VARUN JAISINGH ASHER, MUMBAI

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

ITA 8251/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Girish Agrawalito -19(3)(1), Mumbai Varun Jaisingh Asher Room No.405, 4Th Floor, Piramal Arkade Rise, 17Th Floor, 31-A, Vs. Chambers, Lower Parel Mumbai Carmichael Road, Cumballa Hills, 400012 Mumbai 400026 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aiapa1791N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri. Sushil Shengde, SR DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54FSection 56(2)(x)

concerned with the action of the AO in treating Tenancy Arrangement as Sham after rejection of Documentary Evidence which resulted into disallowance of Section 54F exemption claimed by the appellant. The AO concluded that the tenancy agreement dated 05.08.2014 between the assessee and his family members was a colourable device

DEVI MANUBHAI SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO - CIRCLE 32(1) , MUMBAI

ITA 7005/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Piyush ChhajedFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 54F

reassessment proceedings observing as under: “Ground 4: Jurisdiction for Addition The Appellant argues that the addition of Rs. 83,43,016 by denying section 54F exemption is beyond the Assessing Officer‟s jurisdiction, as it was not part of the reasons recorded, and no addition was made for the buyback

LAKHMI CHAND,PALWAL, FARIDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), FARIDABAD

Appeal are hereby dismissed

ITA 219/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2015-16 Lakhmi Chand, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 979, Mohalla Khail Kalana Ward-1(4), Palwal, Rasulpur, Faridabad B.O. Rasulpur, Faridabad, Haryana Pan: Admps2895L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 54Section 54F

capital gains when selling a capital asset other than a residential house, such as shares, stocks, bonds, or gold. 6.7 The Income tax section 54F exemption is available to individuals and Hindu Undivided Families (HUFs). Other entities, 2 | P a g e such as companies or partnerships, do not qualify

GIRISH MOHAN,HARYANA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8816/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshgirish Mohan, Vs. Acit, 725, Udyog Vihar, Phase-2, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaqpm4017P Assessee By : Sh. P. C. Yadav, Adv Sh. Raghav Sharma, Ca Revenue By: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement /07/2023

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR

Section 54F

deduction to constructed portion Finding of the CIT(A) in Para-4. 18 Page number-20 15 Submissions of the assessee on section 54F exemption are as under a. The observation of the CIT(A) that the legislature want that the exemption should only be allowed to an assessee

SANJIV AHUJA,DELHI vs. ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 977/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Akshat Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Dudeja,Sr. DR

Section 13(2)Section 54

assessee was offered a part of built up area, even if assessee was given five different flats assessee would be entitled to claim section 54F exemption in respect of investment made for all five flats. 8. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case