← All Phrases

“Section 54(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 54Section 54(2)55 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 54(2) is Sanjeev Lal v. CIT (365 ITR 389), cited in 122 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 54(2)

Sanjeev Lal v. CIT
365 ITR 389 · 2014 · Supreme Court
122
citing judgments

For claiming capital gains exemption under beneficial provisions like section 54, the 'date of transfer' can be the date of the agreement to sell, particularly when coupled with substantial advance consideration or an enforceable right, adopting a purposive and liberal interpretation to acknowledge the assessee's intent.

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. D. Ananda Basappa
309 ITR 329 · 2009 · High Court
97
citing judgments

For exemption under Section 54, the expression 'a residential house' allows for investment in multiple residential units that form one functional unit, as 'a' does not imply a singular number. The amendment to Section 54, effective from April 1, 2015, is prospective.

CIT v. Gurnam Singh
327 ITR 278 · 2010 · High Court
66
citing judgments

For capital gains exemption under Section 54F, the new residential house is not required to be purchased exclusively in the assessee's own name; acquisition in joint names or in the name of a spouse qualifies for the exemption. This principle also applies to Section 54 due to their pari materia nature.

Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Ltd. v. State of Haryana
340 ITR 1 · 2012 · Supreme Court
64
citing judgments

A transfer of immovable property by way of sale is legally valid only through a duly stamped and registered deed of conveyance. Unregistered instruments like agreements to sell, General Power of Attorney, or wills do not transfer title or create an interest in the property.

Hirday Naran v. Income Tax Officer
78 ITR 26 · 1970 · Supreme Court
56
citing judgments

Even if statutory language appears merely enabling, courts infer a duty to exercise such power when it aids a citizen's right. Public authorities cannot decline to act when circumstances warrant help, nor can they act to a person's detriment without justification.

Commissioner of Income-tax v. MAC Public Charitable Trust
144 Taxmann.com 54 · 2022 · High Court
55
citing judgments

Additions to income based on statements recorded under Section 132(4) during a search operation are valid, even if later retracted, provided the additions are supported by corroborative seized material and other evidence establishing unaccounted income or transactions.

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.

Judgments citing Section 54(2)

Sanjeev Behl, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Int Tax Ward, 1(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5345/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri K GopalFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar G Subramanyam, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 144C(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)Section 250Section 56Section 80

return of income under section 139 of the Act, it is evident that there was a sufficient compliance with the provisions of section 54(2) of the Act. It is further pertinent to note that as per Rule 10 of the Capital Gains Accounts Scheme, 1988, the amount withdrawn from ... amount of capital gains was also deposited by the assessee in the Capital Gains Scheme Account in compliance with the provisions of section 54(2) of the Act, we are of the considered view that the assessee rightly claimed exemption under section 54 of the Act. Accordingly

Sridhar Reddy Bayapu, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 841/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us:

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

constructed a residential house to be eligible for exemption U/s. 54 or the capital gains arising from the sale of house property, where section 54(2) stipulates that if the amount of capital gains has not been utilized within a year, it has to be deposited in a notified capital ... must be interpreted in favour of the Revenue. In the present appeal, the appellant had not complied with the mandatory provisions of section 54(2). The AO has also recorded a finding that no amount has been withdrawn out fo the sale proceeds

Kuldeep Singh Shekhawat, Kota vs. ITO W-2(1), Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 701/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Gagan Goyalkuldeep Singh Shekhawat, 11, Samridhi Traders, Police Line, Gopal Vihar, Baran Road-324001 Pan No. Araps0973M ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Kota …... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar, JCIT, Ld. DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 54Section 54BSection 54F

Capital Gains Account Scheme before the prescribed date so that an assessee may not lose upon the exemption of unutilized funds. Section 54(2) reads as under: "The amount of the capital gain which is not appropriated by the assessee towards the purchase of the new asset made within ... construction of the new asset together with the amount so deposited shall be deemed to be the cost of the new asset : ……" 10. Section 54(2) provides for an interesting proposition that the amount of capital gains which is not appropriated by the assessee for prescribed purposes within one year

Annirutha Raghuveer, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allow

ITA 2239/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shrimanoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. D. Babitha, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(2)

barring the deposit of the sale proceeds in the "capital gain scheme the "capital gain scheme account" as prescribed under section 54(2) of the Act. In that decision reliance prescribed under section 54(2) of the Act. In that decision reliance prescribed under section 54(2

Jagdish Parshad Jain, Panipat vs. DCIT Central Circle Karnal, Karnal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3300/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Inamul Haq S/O Sh. Mohd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Yamin, Vill.Megh Chhappar, Ward-2. Ambalaa Road, Saharanpur (U.P) Saharanpur Pan: Aaiph2840K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(4)

date of transfer, than it is to be considered, that, the assessee has satisfied, the mandatory requirement U/s 54(1) to get exemption. Section 54(2) can not be read in isolation and mere non compliance of procedural requirement U/s 54(2), itself cannot stand, in way of assessee

Smt. Sita Khandelwal, Bareilly vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Bareilly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 687/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow03 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54F

been made on purchase of property or construction thereon on or before 30/09/2015. The Assessing Officer held that it was mandatory as per section 54(2) of the Act to deposit whole capital gain in capital gains account but the assessee failed to do so. In view of these facts

Gobindram Chandramani Vivek, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in the manner indicated in this order

ITA 656/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok A Kulkarni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54F

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE “A” BENCHES, BANGALORE BEFORE MRS. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR

Shri Jignesh Jaysukhlal Ghiya, Vadodara vs. The DCIT Cirlce-4(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 324/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

accounts under capital gain claim at all Therefore, the claim of the same is required to be weighed on the second time of Section 54(2) of the Act whether the capital gain has been utilized for the purchase of new asset before the date of furnishing return of income ... return of income before either under s.139(1) or under s.139(4) of the Act will be deemed to be sufficient compliance of Section 54(2) of the Act.” 9. Further the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of C. Aryama Sundaram Vs. CIT reported

Sh. Jagmohan Singh, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, CC-1, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 421/CHANDI/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

submitted that at the time of filing of return of income, the assessee was aware that the condition under section 54(2) are not fulfilled as the assessee has neither purchased/constructed the new asset nor deposited the amount under the scheme notified by the Central Government. Under these circumstances ... defined, the assessee shall be eligible for deduction as per quantum so specified under clause (i) and (ii) of section 54(1). Section 54(2) provides that where the amount of capital gains is not utilized by him before the date of furnishing the return of income under section

Anubhav Kapoor, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer - 2(1)(1), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2364/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54B

invested in purchase of residential flat, within the time prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act; (6) the express term used under section 54(2) referred to investment made prior to filing of "return of income" under section 139, without any suffix thereto, so as to hold that even ... assessee after the due date of filing of ITR in the case of the assessee. The AO after analyzing the provision of section 54(2) of the Act held that assessee should have deposited LTCG of Rs.85,55,000/-, which was not utilized to acquire new property before

Sheela Ramchand Uttamchandani, Mumbai vs. ITO-30(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3398/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54

which the transfer took place, or the assessee has within the period of three years after that date constructed a residential house. Section 54(2) of the Act further requires that the amount of capital gain that is not appropriated or utilised by the assessee for the purchase or construction ... shall be deposited in the Capital Gains Scheme Account before furnishing such return. It is further pertinent to note that the proviso to section 54(2) of the Act provides that if the amount deposited under the Capital Gains Account Scheme is not utilized for the purchase or construction

Narendra Balusu, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 14(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 594/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.594/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Shri Narendra Balusu, Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 14(1) Pan:Acxpb4000E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 08/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20/05/2024 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Narendra Balusu (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 31/10/2023 For The Ay 2021- 22. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Under:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54ESection 54F

also submitted that the assessee has deposited an amount of Rs.3,88,83,000/- in the specified bank account in accordance with section 54(2) of the Act and against the said deposit of Rs.3,88,83,000/-, claimed deduction of Rs.2,04,81,789/- u/s 54F from the LTCG ... clear from the Bank statement that whether the account is a specified bank account in accordance with section 54(2) of the Act or not. Therefore, he submitted that suitable direction may be given to the AO to verify the nature of the account before allowing any deduction u/s 54

Rajib Chakraborty, Kolkata vs. ITO- Ward-30(3), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1279/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

simply affirmed the order of AO by holding that the assessee has failed to comply with the said provision of Section 54(2) as the assessee has failed to deposit the said amount in the specified bank account. 17. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record

Thanwardas Lalchand Motwani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(3)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 3975/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ashish A ThakurdesaiFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 250Section 54

took place Thanwardas Lalchand Motwani. purchased a residential house or within the period of three years after that date constructed a residential house. Section 54(2) of the Act further requires that the amount of capital gains which is not appropriated or utilised by the assessee for the purchase ... Capital Gains Scheme Account on 26.09.2013, therefore, we are of the considered view that the assessee has duly complied with the provisions of section 54(2) of the Act. Thus, we find no basis in the findings of the learned CIT(A) in concluding that the assessee has not filed

Rajendra Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 107/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganesh[Assessment Year: 2017-18]

Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54F

IDBI Bank Capital Gain 10,00,000 Scheme 4. In response to show-cause notice, the assessee submitted that nowhere in the section 54(2), it has been mentioned that assessee should deposit the same money which was received as sale consideration. The only condition is that the amount should

Tarun Kumar Ratan Singh Rathi, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 32(1), Mumbai

ITA 2695/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54

used the expression 'towards the purchase of plant and machinery as in Section 54(4) of the Act in contrast to Section 54(2) of the Act wherein the words 'towards is used before the word 'purchase'. The expression 'purchased' used in sub-clause (a) of section ... judgment of the High Court is set aside.. 15. Without prejudice to the above, the appellant submits that as per section 54 (2) exemption to the extent to the amount utilized for construction or purchase is to be granted in the year of transfer of assets & the consideration

Indira Giri, Jaipur vs. Assessing Officer, Income Tax Deparment Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 511/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: The Due Date Of Furnishing Itr, Therefore Deposit In Capital Gain Account For Compliance U/S 54(2) Was Impossible On The Part Of The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Manik (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54F

income of the instant year. Accordingly, we are of the view that there is no requirement to comply with the provisions of section 54(2) of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 17 Indira Giri vs. ITO 1.11 Ld. AO has rejected the claim of exemption

Maninder Kartik, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Gurgaon

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5649/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra[Assessment Year: 2013-14]

Section 54Section 54(2)

54(1) of the Act and the assessee could not be denied exemption u/s 54 for mere non-compliance of requirement under section 54(2) of the Act. Examining the present case and touchstone of the case laws, we find that payment in the next week itself from the date

Dhananjay Madhukar Naik, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2988/MUM/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledhananjay Madhukar Naik V. Ito 12(3)(3) 306, Meghdoot Chsl, Sahaji Raje Marg Room No. 1631, 16Th Floor Koldongri, Vile Parle (W) Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai- 400057 Mumbai- 400021 Pan: Alrpn7498M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Anil Masand Department Represented By : Shri P.D. Chougule

Section 54Section 54ESection 54F

amount has not been deposited by assessee in the capital gains account scheme before filing of Income-tax return as required by section 54(2). 9. It has been decided in a number of cases that for the purpose of claiming exemption u/s 54, investment of substantial amount

DCIT- CC 6 (4), Mumbai vs. Divya Sameer Gehlaut, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is PARTLY ALLOWED

ITA 1612/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyaldcit Cen. Circle – 6(4), R. No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 ...... Appellant Vs. Smt. Divya Sameer Gehlaut 17Th Floor, Tower-1, India Bulls Finance Centre, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai-400 013 Pan – Ajbpg2722R ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal & Om Kandalgaokar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 250Section 54Section 54F

Sameer Gehlaut within the prescribed period under section 54. As regards charging the capital gain in subsequent year as per the proviso to section 54(2) which refers to the situation where the assessee has made a deposit in the Capital Gain Account Scheme as notified by the Government before ... expires. Therefore, once the assessee satisfies the condition of depositing the amount in the capital gain account scheme, only then the proviso to section 54(2) can be pressed into service. In case the assessee has not deposited the amount in the capital gain account scheme, then the investment