← All Phrases

“long-term capital asset”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(29AA)272 judgments

The decision most relied on for long-term capital asset is CIT v. Manjula J. Shah (355 ITR 474), cited in 113 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on long-term capital asset

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).

CIT v. Ace Builders (P) Ltd.
281 ITR 210 · 2005 · High Court
88
citing judgments

The deeming fiction in Section 50, which treats capital gains from depreciable assets as short-term, applies only for the purpose of computing capital gains under that section. For other provisions, such as set-off of losses under Section 74 or deductions under Section 54E/54EC, the asset's original character (long-term or short-term) is to be considered.

CIT, Panji v. Dempo Company Limited
74 Taxmann.com 15 · 2016 · Supreme Court
62
citing judgments

The 20% tax rate under Section 112 applies to capital gains arising from the transfer of a depreciable asset, even if it is deemed a short-term capital gain under Section 50, provided the asset was held for more than 36 months. The fiction created by Section 50 for treating such gains as short-term does not alter the long-term nature of the asset for applying the tax rate under Section 112.

CIT v. T.N. Aravinda Reddy
120 ITR 46 · 1979 · Supreme Court
54
citing judgments

The word 'purchase' in Section 54(1) and analogous sections like 54F of the Income-tax Act must be given its common, liberal meaning, including acquisition for a price, payment in kind, adjustment of debt, or other monetary consideration. A transfer of a co-owner's share for consideration qualifies as a 'purchase' for claiming capital gains exemption.

CIT v. J.R. Subramanya Bhat
165 ITR 571 · 1987 · High Court
39
citing judgments

Exemption under Section 54 of the Income-tax Act for capital gains invested in a new residential house is not denied even if the construction of the new house commenced before the sale of the original asset.

PCIT v. Vembu Vaidyanathan
413 ITR 248 · 2019 · High Court
32
citing judgments

For capital gains computation, the date of allotment of a residential unit under a construction scheme is the date of acquisition, not the date of agreement or possession. This applies even if possession is delivered later, as the allotment letter confers the right to hold the property.

Tilokchand & Sons. v. ITO
413 ITR 189 · 2019 · High Court
31
citing judgments

A residential house for the purpose of Section 54 of the Income Tax Act can include more than one or plural residential houses, prior to April 1, 2015.

CIT v. Coromandel Industries Ltd.
370 ITR 586 · 2015 · High Court
27
citing judgments

Investment in bonds for Section 54EC deduction made within six months from the date of transfer of the original asset is considered proper, even if made in different financial years.

Judgments citing long-term capital asset

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Harsh Sandeep Thakore, Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1703/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Renu Jauhri, Am Income Tax Officer, Mumbai Harsh Sandeep Thakore 4Th Floor, Harvansh, N. S. Road, 8, 502, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400012. Vs. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle, West, Mumbai – 400049. Pan/Gir No. Aaapt4930A (Appellant) : (Respondent) C.O. No. 81/Mum/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 1703/Mum/2024) (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer, Mumbai Harsh Sandeep Thakore 4Th Floor, Harvansh, N. S. Road, 8, 502, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400012. Vs. Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle, West, Mumbai – 400049. Pan/Gir No. Aaapt4930A (Appellant) : (Respondent) : Shri. Reepal Tralshawala Assessee By Respondent By : Shri. Hemanshu Joshi (Sr. Dr.) Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.05.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Respondent: Shri. Hemanshu Joshi (SR. DR.)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144(3)Section 148Section 250Section 54F

case of an assessee being an individual or a Hindu undivided family, the capital gain arises from the transfer of any long-term capital asset, not being a residential house (hereafter in this section referred to as the original asset), and the assessee has, within a period of one year