Section 49 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.73

Section 49 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 73 (Cost with reference to certain modes of acquisition) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 73 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 49 is CIT v. Manjula J. Shah (355 ITR 474), cited in 113 of the 176 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 49

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.

Joint Commissioner. 10. In Shin Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd. v. Aksh Optifibre Ltd.
7 SCC 234 · 2005 · Reported
75
citing judgments

A statute prescribing a procedure using negative language (e.g., 'in no other manner') imposes absolute requirements, and failure to comply will invalidate the entire proceeding.

Girnar Traders v. State of Maharashtra
7 SCC 555 · 2007 · Supreme Court
16
citing judgments

Only the ratio decidendi of a judgment, which is the principle of law that decides the dispute, can be relied upon as precedent, not obiter dicta or casual observations. A court's decision must be read as a whole and its observations considered in light of the questions before the court.

Mittal Engineering Works P. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise
1 SCC 203 · 1997 · Supreme Court
14
citing judgments

A court decision can only be relied upon for its ratio decidendi, which is the principle of law that decides the dispute. Obiter dicta or casual observations are not binding precedents. A decision cannot be cited to support the proposition that it did not decide something.

AP Paper Mills Ltd. v. ACIT
128 TTJ 596 · 2010 · ITAT
12
citing judgments

Goodwill arising on amalgamation is an asset and eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The actual cost of such goodwill in the hands of the amalgamated company is the same as it would have been in the hands of the amalgamating company.

Trib.) 12. Hindustan Industrial Resources Ltd. v. ACIT
335 ITR 77 · 2011 · High Court
12
citing judgments

Land classified as agricultural by the District Collector is considered agricultural land for tax purposes, regardless of the owner's intention to use it for industrial purposes or the absence of agricultural operations.

Tulsidas Kilachand v. CIT
42 ITR 1 · 1961 · Supreme Court
5
citing judgments
CIT v. Scindia Steam Naviagation Co. Ltd.
125 ITR 118 · High Court
4
citing judgments
SKF India Ltd. v. DCIT
168 Taxmann.com 328 · 2024 · ITAT
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 49

Smt. Padmaben N. Patel, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bardoli, Surat

ITA 275/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr.Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.275/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt.Padmaben N. Patel, Vs The Income Tax Officer, Village Mota, Taluka: Bardoli, . Ward-1, Surat. District: Surat. [Pan: Bmhpp 9078 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2201/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Vinaben Pravinbhai Patel, Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(5), Surat. At & Post: Kosmada, Taluka: . Kamrej, District: Surat – 395008. [Pan: Asbpp 6448 G] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Bharat Jhaveri - Advocate राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Smt. Anupama Singla - Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 13.01.2021 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 13.01.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Judicial Memeber: 1. These Two Appeals By Two Assessees Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Surat Dated 04.12.2015 & 19.07.2016 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. In Both The Appeals, The Assessee’S Have Raised Certain Common Grounds Of Appeal. Facts Are Common In Smt.Padmaben N.Patel & Smt. Vinaben P.Patel (02 Appeals)/

Smt. Vinaben Pravinbhai Patel, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(5), Surat

ITA 2201/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr.Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.275/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt.Padmaben N. Patel, Vs The Income Tax Officer, Village Mota, Taluka: Bardoli, . Ward-1, Surat. District: Surat. [Pan: Bmhpp 9078 F] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2201/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Vinaben Pravinbhai Patel, Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(5), Surat. At & Post: Kosmada, Taluka: . Kamrej, District: Surat – 395008. [Pan: Asbpp 6448 G] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओर से /Assessee By Shri Bharat Jhaveri - Advocate राज"वक"ओर से /Revenue By Smt. Anupama Singla - Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 13.01.2021 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement On: 13.01.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Judicial Memeber: 1. These Two Appeals By Two Assessees Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Surat Dated 04.12.2015 & 19.07.2016 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. In Both The Appeals, The Assessee’S Have Raised Certain Common Grounds Of Appeal. Facts Are Common In Smt.Padmaben N.Patel & Smt. Vinaben P.Patel (02 Appeals)/

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Devi Sea Foods Limited, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 497/VIZ/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.497/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S Devi Sea Foods Limited Circle-3(1) D.No.50-1-51/1 Visakhapatnam Asr Nagar, Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aabcd0248B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.130/Viz/2019 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.497/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) M/S Devi Sea Foods Limited Vs Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.50-1-51/1 Income Tax Asr Nagar Circle-3(1) Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aabcd0248B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व कीओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.Ravi Shankar Narayan, Cit, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 08.06.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2020

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.Ravi Shankar Narayan
Section 180Section 2Section 50Section 50B