Section 45(1) of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 45(1) is Morvi Industries Ltd. v. CIT (82 ITR 835), cited in 136 of the 44 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 45(1)

Morvi Industries Ltd. v. CIT
82 ITR 835 · 1971 · Supreme Court
136
citing judgments

Income accrues when it becomes due, vesting the assessee with the right to claim the amount, even if payment is not immediate. It requires a corresponding liability from the other party to pay, emphasizing real rather than hypothetical accrual, particularly for assessees using the mercantile system of accounting.

Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT
77 ITR 253 · 1970 · Supreme Court
49
citing judgments

The Supreme Court clarifies the distinction between income chargeable as capital gains and income taxable as business profits, guiding the assessment of whether a transaction constitutes a transfer of a capital asset or is in the nature of trade.

CIT v. A.N.Naik Associates
265 ITR 346 · 2004 · High Court
24
citing judgments

Capital gains arising from the distribution of capital assets on the dissolution of a firm or other association of persons, or otherwise, are taxable under section 45(4) based on the fair market value of the asset on the date of transfer. This applies even to reconstitutions of partnership businesses as part of a family settlement.

Malabar Fisheries Co. v. CIT
120 ITR 49 · 1979 · Supreme Court
22
citing judgments

Distribution, division, or allotment of assets to partners upon dissolution of a firm is a mutual adjustment of rights and not a transfer of assets by the firm, as the firm does not hold separate rights in partnership assets.

TUV India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
110 Taxmann.com 175 · 2019 · ITAT
19
citing judgments
Kushal K. Bangia v. ITO
18 Taxmann.com 31 · 2012 · ITAT
8
citing judgments
Tejinder Singh v. Dy. CIT
19 Taxmann.com 4 · 2012 · Reported
7
citing judgments
Narain Dutt Sharma v. ITO
91 Taxmann.com 463 · 2018 · ITAT
6
citing judgments
ACIT (2010) 126 ITD 100 (MUM. TRIB.) 4. HULAS RAHUL GUPTA v. CIT
18 Taxmann.com 188 · 2012 · ITAT
5
citing judgments
Acumen Fund Advisory Services India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
50 Taxmann.com 317 · 2014 · Reported
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 45(1)

LATE RAJESHAM RAGI,KARIMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KARIMNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 776/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Apr 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.776/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2013-2014 Late Ragi Rajesham, The Income Tax Officer, Karimnagar. Ward-2, Vs. Pin – 505 001. Telangana. Karimnagar. Pan Aaxpr4513J Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : Sri Rv Nageshwar Sharma, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 10.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10.04.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Appellant: Sri RV Nageshwar Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 148

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS-3), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. TARUN SANTRAMDAS VARMA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2549/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kmble

For Appellant: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 194Section 201Section 250Section 46A

KAMINI VELMURUGAN,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

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

ITA 478/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Year : 2016-17 Kamini Velmurugan, Income Tax Officer, 18/369, Rajeshwari Chs, Ward-42(2)(3), Subhasnagar, Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai-400071. Mumbai-400051. Pan : Agzpn9256A (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ms. Sailee Gujarathi For Revenue : Shri Aditya Rai, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 04-03-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 17-03-2026 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 19-11-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessment In This Case Was Completed U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act‟), Vide Order Dt. 12-12-2023, Wherein The Ao Has Brought To Tax A Sum Of Rs. 42,50,000/- As Short Term Capital Gains U/S. 45 Of The Act In Absence Of Any Explanation/Evidences Submitted By The Assessee In Respect Of Sale Of Immoveable Property As Well As Cost Of Acquisition. The 2 Assessee Thereafter Carried The Matter In Appeal Before The Ld.Cit(A), Who Has Since Dismissed The Appeal On Account Of Delayed Filing & Against The Said Order, The Assessee Is In Appeal Before Us.

For Appellant: Ms. Sailee GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai, Sr.DR
Section 147Section 45Section 45(1)

BIHARILAL,HOSHANGABAD vs. COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NFAC-DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 278/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2018-19 Assessment Unit Of Income- Biharilal, Tax Department S/O Gaurishankar, 508, Ward No. 15, बनाम/ Shobhapur, Vs. Hoshangabad (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Eonpb2765E Assessee By Ms. Saniya Farhaz Memon, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 50C(2)

SURESH KUMAR,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, W-4, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 390/CHANDI/2023[215-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain,CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 151Section 28Section 56

SAHODHAR REDDY MUDDASANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1619/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1619/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Shri Sahodhar Reddy Vs. Dy.Cit Muddasani Central Circle 1(3) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aelpm9122N (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca Shri C Maheshwar Reddy राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Sahodhar Reddy Muddasani (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 24.09.2025 For The A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: CA Shri C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 45(1)Section 53A

MANOHAR REDDY CHERUKU,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1625/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad05 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1625/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Shri Manohar Reddy Vs. Dy.Cit Cheruku, Hyderabad Central Circle 1(3) Pan:Aelpc8785R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri C Maheshwar Reddy, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 05/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri C Maheshwar Reddy, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rehman, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 45(1)Section 53A

SANTOSH RAMDAS MOZE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 12(3), PUNE

ITA 2414/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2015-16 Santosh Ramdas Moze Ito, Ward 12(3), Pune Moze Aali, Near Shubham Gym, Vs. Lohagaon, Pune – 411047 Pan: Cdkpm0264K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manoj Deshpande Department By : Smt. Indira R. Adakil, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 03-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04-12-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Manoj DeshpandeFor Respondent: Smt. Indira R. Adakil, Addl.CIT
Section 147

ABDUL RAHMAN ASAD ,RIYADH, SAUDI ARABIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTL. TAX 1(1)(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2433/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Abdul Rahman Asad, Vs. Dcit, House No.47, Behind Jain Mandi, Circle Int. Tax 1(1)(1), Mohalla Barihat, New Delhi. Bahraich – 271 801 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aofpa6981F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Alok Vasant, Fca Ms. Poonam Ahuja, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date Of Order : 12.11.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Delhi - 42 [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 03.03.2025 For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, The Assessee Is A Non-Resident & Filed The Original Return Of Income For Ay 2022-23 On 27.07.2022 Declaring Taxable Income Of Rs.4,86,560/- (Income From House Property Rs.4,64,444/-, Income From Other Sources Rs.32,115/- & Loss From Long

For Appellant: Shri Alok Vasant, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 199

ARJESH KUMAR,PATIALA vs. ITO NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

ITA 876/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

ITA 172/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

SRINIVAS PAMPATI,KARIMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KARIMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 228/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Lalith Kishore SharmaFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR-DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 54F

PARAS AND SHUBHAM CHAUDHARY LEGAL HEIR OF KANHAIYA LAL,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD 2, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1236/CHANDI/2016[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Rishab Gupta & Shri Mukesh Aggarwal,CAsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 10(37)Section 18Section 28Section 4Section 5

DEVI DAYAL,KAITHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , KAITHAL

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 899/CHANDI/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Sept 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 899/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Devi Dayal, Vs The Ito, Pundri Anaj Mandi, Ward – 1, Kaithal-Haryana 136026. Kaithal. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aajpd5851H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

SHOBHANA DINESH TRIVEDI,VALSAD vs. ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE, VAPI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1042/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 45(1)Section 54

ABUSHA INVESTMENT & MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLP,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3417/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr.Bhabagrahi Dash, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 2(47)Section 250Section 45(1)Section 45(4)

ACIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2618/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

HEMANTKUMAR GAJANAN LAD,KALAMBOLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, PANVEL

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2765/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: PendingITAT Pune04 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2765/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Hemantkumar Gajanan Lad, Vs. Ito, Ward-5, Panvel. 703, Krushidhan Chs, Sector 3, Kalamboli- 410218. Pan : Abjpl6243N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajinkya M. Vaishampayan Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing 02.06.2025 : Date Of Pronouncement : 04.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 31.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. Ld. Dr Has Not Raised Any Objection To Condone The Delay, Therefore We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya M. Vaishampayan
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 45(1)

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PANVEL CIRCLE PANVEL, PANVEL vs. DNYANESHWAR BARKYA MASANE, PANVEL

ITA 1640/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, THANE, ASHAR IT PARK, THANE WEST vs. DARSHAN ENTERPRISES, GHODBUNDER ROAD, THANE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4969/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 68

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3