Search: capital gains | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

Search Judgments
Browse by Bench
Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

80 results for “capital gains”+ Section 54Fclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai431 Delhi412 Chennai270 Bangalore241 Hyderabad167 Ahmedabad139 Jaipur122 Pune109 Indore80 Kolkata72 Chandigarh53 Surat48 Visakhapatnam47 Karnataka31 Nagpur27 Cochin27 Raipur23 Patna19 Agra16 Rajkot15 Amritsar14 Lucknow12 Cuttack11 Jabalpur11 Jodhpur9 Dehradun8 Telangana7 SC5 Ranchi5 Calcutta4 Kerala3 Guwahati2 Allahabad2 Varanasi2 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 263129 Section 54F99 Section 54B90 Section 143(3)68 Addition to Income50 Deduction45 Section 14737 Exemption31 Section 14826 Long Term Capital Gains

SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR BAFNA,UJJAIN vs. THE ITO 1(1), UJJAIN

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

ITA 637/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./ I.T.A. No. 637/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 45Section 54F

section 54F reads as under :- "54F. Capital gain on transfer of certain capital assets not to be charged in case

SHRI SHALIGRAM BAROD, ,INDORE vs. PR. CIT-1, INDORE

ITA 625/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Showing 1–20 of 80 · Page 1 of 4

24

Revision u/s 26324

Capital Gains24

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble’ Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Shri Shaligram Barod, Pr. Cit-I, Ah/29, Hig, Sukhliya Indore बनाम/ Indore Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No. Ahfpp4068H Appellant By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri S.B. Prasad, Cit-Dr

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)Section 54Section 54BSection 54FSection 54F(1)

section 263 of the Act for examination of issue related to the Capital gain on sale of plot and deduction as claimed by the assessee u/s 54F

GOVERDHAN LAL YADAV,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(5), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

ITA 854/IND/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year : 2015-16 Goverdhan Lal Yadav, Ito-3(5) 112/12, Nanda Nagar, Indore बनाम/ Opp. Anoop Takies, Vs. Indore (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Aaypy9432A Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, Ar Revenue By Shri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.07.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 253(5)Section 54B

gains either in purchasing the residential house or in constructing a residential house within the period stipulated in Section 54F(1), if the assessee wants the benefit of Section 54F, then he should deposit the said capital

IMRAN KHAN,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO2 (2), BHYOPAL

In the result the issue No

ITA 168/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manish Boradimran Khan Ito 2(2) S/O Sh. Gulab Khan H. No.35 Bhopal Village-Inayatpura Kolar Board, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Ckqpk5708M Assessee By Shri Niranjan Purandar Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.01.2024

capital gains are concerned. The word "assessee"- must be given wide and liberal interpretation so as to include his legal heirs also. There is no warrant for giving too strict an interpretation to the word "assessee" as that would frustrate the object of granting exemption. I1. We also find judgments of other. High Courts giving benefit of Section 54F

ACIT CENTRAL-2 INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI .GAURAV TEKRIWAL, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 62/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Acit, Central -2 Shri Gaurav Tekriwal Indore बनाम/ 204, Princess Valley, South Tukoganj, Indore Vs. (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Acppt 1628 Q Assessee By Shri Anil Kamal Garg, Arpit Gaur, Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21.11.2022

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 54FSection 55(2)(a)Section 57

54F of the act. Ld. Accordingly, Ld. AO rejected the claim of long-term capital gain and assessed the income of Rs. 3,25,00,000/- as income from other sources by holding thus: “5.8 A notice under section

BHARAT SHAH,INDORE vs. THE ITO3(4), INDORE

In the result, Assessee’s appeal ITANo

ITA 181/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

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

Section 54 and 54F , The relevant portion of the circulars reads as under: 6.Sections 54 and 54F provide that capital gains

SHRI KAILASH BHAGWAN CHOUDHARY,INDORE vs. THE ITO 2(3), INDORE

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

ITA 68/IND/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 54BSection 54F

capital gains are concerned. The word "assessee"- must be given wide and liberal interpretation so as to include his legal heirs also. There is no warrant for giving too strict an interpretation to the word "assessee" as that would frustrate the object of granting exemption. I1. We also find judgments of other. High Courts giving benefit of Section 54F

SMT SHILPA DESAI ,INDORE vs. THE PR CIT -1, INDORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal i

ITA 112/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Smt. Shilpa Desai, Indore Pan – Abzpd 4926 A … Appellant Vs. Pcit-I, Indore … Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54Section 54BSection 54ESection 54F

54F even when the entire documents related to the Income earned from Capital Gain on Sale of Shares and Sale of Land and deduction as claimed against the said capital gain earned by her u/s 54F/54EC of the Act were duly filed by her and have duly been verified by Ld. AO during the course of original assessment proceeding after

KESHAV KANUNGO,BHOPAL vs. ACIT2(1) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

ITA 263/IND/2023[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Keshav Kanungo, Acit, Flat No. A-603, Circle-2(1), Virasha Heights, Bhopal बनाम/ Near Danish Bridge, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Abvpk 2942 F Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 12.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2024

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 4Section 54Section 54BSection 54ESection 54F

capital gain account within Page 3 of 10 Keshav Kanungo, Bhopal ITA No. 263/Ind/2023 – AY 2015-16 the prescribed time limit but he could invest only Rs. 49,18,500/- in purchase of new flat hence, he offered Rs. 26,48,811/- in A.Y. 2018-19 as per the proviso to section 54F

SATYANARAYAN SHARMA,INDORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, INDORE

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

ITA 426/IND/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 154oSection 2Section 263Section 54F

54F. Capital gain on transfer of certain capital assets not to be charged in case of investment in residential house.-(J) Where, in the case of an assessee being an individual, the capital gain arises from the transfer of any long-term capital asset, not being a residential house (hereafter in this section

THE DCIT,, RATLAM vs. SHRI ANIL JHALANI, RATLAM

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as the cross

ITA 246/IND/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 148Section 2(47)(V)Section 54Section 54FSection 54F(1)

capital gain scheme account before filing return of income and as such not fulfilled the condition as provided 54F(4) of the Act. (b) Allowing deduction u/s 54F as the assessee has already own two houses as such the assessee is not eligible for deduction as per proviso (a)(i) of section

SHRI SURESH AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. THE ITO -5(3), INDORE

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

ITA 251/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 54B

capital gain on the sale of land used for agriculture purpose should be deposited before the date of furnishing the return of the income u/s 139. Section 139 cannot mean only section 139(1) but it means all sub-sections of section 139. In support of this proposition the Ld. AR placed reliance in the case of Ashok Kapasiawala

SHRI SUKHRAM MUKATI,INDORE vs. THE ITO WD-3(3), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of Shri Sukhram Mukati and

ITA 409/IND/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.409&410/Ind/2014 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2008-09

Section 143Section 54BSection 68Section 69Section 69A

Section 54F, the investment in the residential house should be made in the assessee's name and in as much as the residential house was purchased by the assessee in the name of his wife, the deduction was not allowable. He reduced the deduction and computed the capital gains

RAMKUNWAR PATIDAR,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 2 (4), BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 208/IND/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Ramkunwar Patidar, Income-Tax Officer, Village Salliya, 2(4), बनाम/ Post Bawadia Kalan, Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Blxpp4909C Assessee By Shri S.S.Solanki, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22.02.2024

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

capital gain 1,86,107 32,32,461 Page 3 of 11 Shri Ramkunwar Patidar, Bhopal vs. ITO, 2(4), Bhopal ITA No. 208/Ind/2022 – AY 2009-10 Aggrieved, the assessee carried mater in first appeal but did not get any relief. Now, the assessee has come in next appeal before us. 3. Ld. AR for assessee drew our attention

PRAGYA SAXENA,BHOPAL vs. PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 126/IND/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Pragya Saxena Pr. Cit-1 बनाम/ Bhopal Bhopal Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Awfps 9685 L Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpandey, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 18.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 03.02.2023

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 54F

section 54F prescribed proportionate exemption in the ratio of “new investment ÷ actual consideration”, the exemption would at best be Rs. 57,26,430 (capital gain

SHRI VINOD CHOUDHARY,INDORE vs. ITO1 3), INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 206/IND/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Vinod Choudhary, Ito 1(3) 12, Niranjanpur, Indore Vs. Lasudia, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Akrpv 4892 Q Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah & Soumya Bomb, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28.02.2023

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 54F

Capital Gain accrued to the assessee in the A.Y. 2011-12. The assessee offered the same in his return of income and claimed exemption under Section 54F

SHRI DINESH NIGAM,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2 (3), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly

ITA 457/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 50CSection 54Section 54B

54F of the Act, even if the investments have been made jointly with other brothers? Alternatively, whether the assessee would be entitled for deduction u/s 54B of the Act in respect of the entire sale proceeds invested jointly with [ITA No.457/Ind/2017] [Mr. Dinesh Nigam, Indore] other brothers? For the sake of clarity, section 54B of the Act is reproduced

THE ITO-2(2), INDORE vs. SMT. MOHAN BAI POKHRANA, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 468/IND/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri O.P.Meena, Am आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A. No.468/Ind/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: 2009-10

Section 54BSection 54ESection 54F

capital gain was computed at Rs. 69,85,350/-. The assessee has claimed exemption of Rs.50 Lacs under section 54EC of the Act on account of investment in REC Bonds, Rs. 15,49,883/- under section 54F

SHRI HUKUMCHAND CHOUDHARY ,INDORE vs. ITO (3),INDORE, INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 205/IND/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R

Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 54F

Capital Gain accrued to the assessee in the A.Y. 2011-12. The assessee offered the same in his return of income and claimed exemption under Section 54F

THE DCIT-3(1), INDORE vs. KUMARI SHEETAL GARG, INDORE

In the result Ground No. 1& 2 of the

ITA 254/IND/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2008-09 Dcit-3(1), Kumari Sheetal Garg, Indore Vs. 8/2, New Palasia, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Afhpg9179G Revenue By Shri K.C. Selvamani, Sr.Dr Assessee By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ca Date Of Hearing 07.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2019 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 53ASection 54F

capital gain is short term and exemption u/s 54F is not allowable & (ii) The reopening was valid. 6. Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently supported the order of Ld.A.O. 7. Per contra Ld. Counsel for the assessee supported the findings of Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that as per Section