Section 50C(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.78

Section 50C(2) falls under section 50C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 78 (Special provision for full value of consideration in certain cases) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 78 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 50C(2) is Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT (372 ITR 83), cited in 159 of the 293 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 50C(2)

Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT
372 ITR 83 · 2015 · High Court
159
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer is duty-bound to refer the valuation of property to the Departmental Valuation Officer under Section 50C(2) when an assessee disputes the stamp duty valuation or if there is a discrepancy between the actual sale consideration and the guideline value. This reference is mandatory, even if not explicitly requested by the assessee, to ensure a realistic fair market value and avoid injustice.

Muthuraja v. CIT
369 ITR 483 · 2014 · High Court
9
citing judgments
2018) 11 SCC 508, Satya Jain (Dead) Through L.Rs. and Ors. v. Anis Ahmed Rushdie (Dead)
4 SCC 147 · 1976 · Reported
8
citing judgments
(i) CIT vs. Nirbhayram Deluram, 224 ITR 610 (SC) (ii) Mega Trends v. CIT
56 Taxmann.com 282 · 2015 · High Court
8
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 50C(2)

Shri Satish Chandra Katta, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

ITA 439/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Dec 2024AY 2013-14
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Shri Satish Chandra Katta, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, Ground No. 3 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 437/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Dec 2024AY 2011-12
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Shri Satish Chandra Katta, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

ITA 436/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Dec 2024AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT-DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 50C

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Shri Satish Chand Katta, Jaipur

In the result, Ground No. 3 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 352/JPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Kalpana Sharma, Ne Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-59(8), Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3814/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: None (Written request)For Respondent: Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Krishna, Bulandshahr vs. ITO Ward 2(3)(1), Bulandshahar

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3733/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godarakrishna, Vs. Ito, Vill-Hirapur Kalan Ward-2(3)(1), Post-Karvas Dibai- Bulandshahar 203393 Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Glzpk9219K Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/12/2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 50C(2)Section 56(2)(x)

Ajab Singh, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Noida

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose in above terms

ITA 3659/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 144Section 147Section 50C(2)

Debabrata Paul, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2095/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.2095/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Debabrata Paul……….… ……….. ……..……………………....Appellant 5, Bhupen Bose Avenue, Kolkata – 700004. [Pan: Aeypp0909B] Vs. Ito, Ward-44(1), Kolkata…. ….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Gautam Chatterjee, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Susanta Saha & Shri Rajat Datta, Sr. Drs, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 05, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 06, 2024 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.08.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2020-21 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,83,955/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny In Order To Verify The Agricultural Income Claimed By The Assessee. A Notice U/S 142(1) Of The Act Was Issued & In Response To That Notice, The Assessee Submitted His Reply Before The Assessing Officer. During The Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Observed That Rs.44,80,000/- Was Received By The Assessee Which Was Claimed As Exempt Income Purportedly From Sale Of The Agricultural Land. The Assessing Officer However Treated This Amount As

Section 142(1)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 50C(2)

Maya Devi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(4), Ghaziabad

ITA 58/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Maya Devi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(4), Ghaziabad

ITA 57/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Deepchand Khetmal Jain, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

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

ITA 4223/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: 17.10.2024
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 270ASection 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-2(1)(1)(Previously Dy.CIT, Circle-3(1)), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1572/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1572/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani The Dy.Cit बनाम/ A-17, Videocon Housing Colony Circle-2(1)(1) V/S. Chavaj, Bharuch 392 002 Vadodara (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Acnpm 0273 C अपीलाथ&/ (Appellant) '( यथ&/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hemant Suthar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26/12/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14, In Which The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao)”] Under Section 50C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] Was Confirmed Vide Assessment Order Dated 28/03/2016. Facts Of The Case: 2. The Assessee, An Individual Earning Income From Salaries, Trading In Shares & Securities, Capital Gains & Other Sources, Filed His Return Of Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani Vs. The Dcit Asst. Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Suthar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Hakikat Saraf, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer-2(5), Kanpur

ITA 247/LKW/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary, Member A.Y. 2014-15 Hakikat Saraf, Income Tax Officer-2(5), 124/B/168, Govind Nagar, Vs. Kanpur Kanpur-208006 Pan:Afpps4419H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.10.2024 O R D E R Per Sh. Nikhil Choudhary: This Is An Appeal Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Passed By The Cit(A)-1, Kanpur Dated 24.01.2017. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “01. Because The Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.47,33,000/- Under Section 56(2)(Vii)(B)(Ii) Of The I.T. Act, 1961, Which Addition Is Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law & Be Deleted. 02. Because The Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Has Arbitrarily Held, That The Difference Between The Actual Gross Consideration Rs. 1,09,34,000/- & The Stamp Value Estimated By The Stamp Valuation Authorities, Subsequently Reduced By The District Valuation Officer At Rs. 1,56,67,600/- Is Deemed Income Under Section 56(2)(Vii)(B)(Ii) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl CIT DR
Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

Anvis Digital Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Ward 6(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1092/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C(2)Section 56(2)(x)

Rajman, Ambedkar Nagar vs. ITO Ward 3 Ambedkar Nagar, Ambedkar Nagar

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

ITA 79/ALLD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad25 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2018-19 Rajman, Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca Vaibhav Goel 75 Navyug Vs. Ward-3, Ambedkar Nagar Market 1St Floor, Ghaziabad, U.P. Pan:Avgpr9224E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2024 O R D E R Per Sh. Nikhil Choudhary: This Is An Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 12.04.2024, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee In Limine. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 2(14)Section 250Section 50(2)(x)Section 50C(2)Section 56(2)(x)

Nitin Jugalkishore Chendulkar, Amravati vs. ACIT, Amravati Circle, Amravati

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

ITA 75/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 43CSection 50C(2)

Bhakthavalsalam Ramdas, Palakkad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Palakkad

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 95/COCH/2024[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhbhakthavalsalam Ramdas Income Tax Officer 01 M.R. Raman Chettair Son Ward - 2, Palakkad Vs. T.B. Road, Palakkad 678014 [Pan: Acmpr3451L] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 250Section 50C(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

Nirmal Singh, Ayodhya vs. ITO Ward-1, Faizabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 83/LKW/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria & Sa. No. 07/Lkw/2024 (Arising Out Of Ita. No.83/Lkw/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Nirmal Singh The Income Tax Officer, V. 15/2/16, Janki Ghat, Ayodhya- Ward-1, 224123, Faizabad (Up). Cinema Road, Faizabad- New-224001. Pan:Bdsps4165C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri. Rakesh Garg, Adv Respondent By: Shri. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 24 09 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 10 10 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

Swapna Alok Chowdhury, Sambhajinagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Aurangabad

Appeal is allowed for statistical

ITA 1669/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri B.S. Rajpurohit, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 50C(2)

Navin Kumar Nathan, Chennai vs. ITO, International Taxation Ward 2(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1200/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1200/Chny/2024 िनधा7रण वष7 /Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri K. Meenakshisundaram, ITPFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 54F