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)

Lachhman, Salem vs. ITO, Sale

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

ITA 526/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.526/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Lachhman, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 9/1, Sait Extension, Rajaji Road, Ward I(4), Salem, 636 007. Salem. [Pan:Abspl0425F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao:

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50C(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

Ramdoss Ramvijay Kumar, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 14(5), Chennai

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

ITA 3096/CHNY/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3096/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Perfect Press Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 19(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 6239/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Princy Singla, Sr. DR
Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Sri Santhemathavathur Bhadregowda Shivalingaiah, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-7(2)(5), Bangalore

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

ITA 549/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, D.R
Section 234Section 56(2)(vii)

Sadhashiv Budhaji Sase, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Mumbai

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

ITA 3001/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3001/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Sadhashiv Budhaji Sase बिधम/ Cit(A)/Nfac At-Bhisol Village Post- Ito, Ward-3(4), Kalyan Vs. Rayate, Tal-Kalyan, Dist- Rani Mansion, 2Nd Floor, Thane-Kalyan. Murbad Road, Kalyan 421301. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Bqops5907B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S. M. Makhija Revenue By: Shri Aditya M. Rai (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 27.09.2022 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Seven (7) Grounds Of Appeal. However, The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Addition Of Ao Amounting To Rs.93,98,000/- (Rs.47,82,000/- + 46,16,000/-) U/S 56(2)(Vii)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). 3. Brief Fact Of The Case Is That The Assessee Is An Individual Who Derives Income From Commission & Brokerage For Consultation Of Sale & Purchase Of Land. & He Had Filed His Return Of Income On 27.03.2016 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,96,160/-, Which Return Of Income Was Later Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass. After Service Of Statutory Notices, The Assessee Was Directed To File Details Of Land

For Appellant: Shri S. M. MakhijaFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai (Sr. AR)
Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68

G.G. Dandekar Machine Works Ltd., Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 3, Nagpur

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 48/NAG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 G.G. Dandekar Machine Works Ltd Vs. Acit, Circle 3, B-211/1, Midc, Butibori, Nagpur Nagpur-441122 Pan : Aaacg6146L Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Shri G.J. Ninawe Date Of Hearing 16-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09-12-2022

Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Vimlaben Gunvantrai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 485/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, AR &For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr. DR
Section 155(15)Section 50C(2)Section 50C(3)Section 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viii)

Late Devji Morarjibhai Thakrar, L/R. Sunil Devjibhai Thakrar, Jamnagar vs. Income Tax Officer ( International Taxation), Gandhidham(Kutch)

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

ITA 250/RJT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Sept 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Rakesh Fatechand Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO, Natioanl E- Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 214/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2018-19
Section 143(1)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Rajesh R. Sawlani, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

ITA 1498/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143Section 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

Ird Mechanalysis Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 3 (2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4322/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Indra Narayan Tripathi, Gorakhpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range - 02, Gorakhpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 5/VNS/2020[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi04 Jul 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Ashutosh BhardwajFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 253(3)Section 253(5)Section 52C(2)

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. M/S. Hillocks Hotels Private Limited, Visakhapatnam

ITA 537/VIZ/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Visakhapatnam14 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.537/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Hillocks Hotels Pvt Ltd., Circle-3(1), 11-2-16, Prashanth, Daspalla Visakhapatnam. Hills, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. Pan: Aacch 3481 P (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri GVN HariFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

M/S Gods Gift Landmark, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 3(4), Pune

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 600/PUN/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 43CSection 50C(2)

V.. Ramnarayanan, Coimbatore vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

ITA 248/CHNY/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 155Section 250Section 50C(2)

Shauket Hussain M Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(9), Surat

In the result, the grounds of the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 250/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Shaukethussain M Patel, I.T.O., A-504, Sanjay Residency, Ward-1(3)(9), Vs. Causeway Road, Room No. 509, 5Th Floor, Rander, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat-395009. Surat-395001. Pan No. Artpp 2101 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 144Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 54F

Jagdamba Hospitals Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1469/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahum/S. Jagadamba Hospitals Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Pan Aabcj0055G …..Appellant. Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Hyderabad. …..Respondent. Appellant By : Smt. S. Sandhya, Adv. Respondent By : S/Shri Rajendra Kumar & Sunil Goutam. (D.Rs) Date Of Hearing : 10.03.2022. Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2022. O R D E R Per S.S. Godara, J.M. : This Assessee’S Appeal For Asst. Year 2013-14 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Hyderabad’S Order Dt.08.03.2018 Passed In Case No.10484/Cit(A)-2/Hyd/2017-18 In Proceedings Under Section 144 R.W.S. 147 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya, AdvFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajendra Kumar &
Section 144Section 50C(2)

Income Tax Oficer Ward-1, Bidar vs. Sri Rajkumar Agarwal, Hyderabad

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

ITA 3441/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Rajkumar Hanchnal, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50C(2)

Shri. Rajkumar Agarwal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Bidar

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

ITA 3421/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Rajkumar Hanchnal, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50C(2)

Mrs. Jiviben Taljibhai Rabari, Harij vs. ITO, Ward-3, Patan

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

ITA 1592/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavassessment Year :2012-13 Mrs. Jiviben Taljibhai Rabari, Vs. Income Tax Officer, At. Boratwada, Ward-3, Tal. Harij Patan Pan : Clqpd 7447 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) थ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" "" यथ" "" य अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" य थ" थ" Assessee By : Shrihemal Desai, Ca Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05/01/2022 सुनवाई क" तारीख सुनवाई क" तारीख सुनवाई क" तारीख घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/01/2022 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad [“Cit(A)” In Short] Dated 05.09.2016 Passed For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Time Barred By 22 Days. The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay. On Due Consideration Of The Application Of The Assessee As Also Considering The Reason That The Assessee Had Not Received The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Well In Time As Mentioned In The Application, I Deem It Fit & Proper To Condone The Marginal Delay Of 22 Days In Filing Of The Appeal Before The Tribunal. I, Therefore, Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal On Merits.

For Appellant: ShriHemal Desai, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 48Section 50CSection 50C(2)