Which cases are most cited on Section 54G?

Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/s. Accel Limited 421 of (423 ITR 180) — 41 citing judgments; CIT v. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336) — 37 citing judgments; (i) Star India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, 143 TTJ 307(Mum. Trib.) (ii) B S Sangwan v. ITO (54 SOT 172) — 5 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 54G?

BharatTax indexes 49 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 54G of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 54G of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.87

Section 54G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 87 (Exemption of capital gains on transfer of assets in cases of shifting of industrial undertaking from urban area) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 87 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 54G is Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/s. Accel Limited 421 of (423 ITR 180), cited in 41 of the 49 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 54G

Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai v. M/s. Accel Limited 421 of

423 ITR 180 · 2020 · High Court

citing judgments

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax cannot initiate revision proceedings under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer has framed an assessment under Section 143(3) by taking a plausible and possible view on an issue after examining it. Such a revision is considered invalid.

CIT v. G.K. Kabra

211 ITR 336 · 1995 · High Court

citing judgments

For the Commissioner to exercise revisional jurisdiction under Section 263, the show-cause notice must clearly specify the exact error in the assessment order that is considered erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, giving the assessee an adequate opportunity to respond.

(i) Star India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT, 143 TTJ 307(Mum. Trib.) (ii) B S Sangwan v. ITO

54 SOT 172 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 54G

Kloeckner Desma Machinery P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT., Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 555/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2026AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri S N Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 40aSection 54GSection 9(1)(vii)

Kloeckner Desma Machinery Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2579/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2026AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri S N Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 40aSection 54GSection 9(1)(vii)

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Kloeckner Desma Machinery Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2322/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2026AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri S N Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT- DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 40aSection 54GSection 9(1)(vii)

Paras Mehta, Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward 2 (1) (2), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 548/RJT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Brijesh Parekh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54F

DCIT, Circle 52(1), New Delhi vs. Bhupinder Singh Bhalla, New Delhi

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2964/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice Presdient (), Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Respondent: Dr Rakesh Gupta, Adv. (Virtual) S/Shri

Section 142(1)Section 142(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54B

Neha Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 35(5), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2412/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 148Section 151Section 50CSection 50G

Ayyub Jafri, Lucknow vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Lucknow

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

ITA 177/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR

Section 143(3)Section 54FSection 80J

Simmi Batra, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-32(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 6143/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

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

Elango Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle-1, Coimbatore

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

ITA 314/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. Suraj Nahar, C.A ""For Respondent: Ms. D.Komali Krishna,CIT

Section 133Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 54G

Saheb Industries, Ankleshwar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1791/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 272A(1)(d)Section 40Section 54G

Inderpal Singh Chadha, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 22(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 21/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm & Shri Prabhash Shankar, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Karishma Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Sr.DR

Section 144Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 45Section 54

Rejeshri Omprakash Malviya, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(1) (Previously Ward-4(1)(3)), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1053/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 54BSection 54G

Dhirajlal Govindbhai Patel, Rajkot vs. ITO WD 1(2)(1), Rajkot

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 299/RJT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Diesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.299/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2020-21) (Hybrid Hearing) Dhirajlal Govindbhai Patel Vs. The Ito, Ward – 1(2)(1), Mayurpankh Industries, K-1/49, Aayakar Bhawan, Race Course Road-D, Phase-I, Aji Gidc, 80Ft Ring Road, Road, Rajkot – 360001 Rajkot – 360003 Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Agepp0489N (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22 /10 /2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22 /01 /2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre [(In Short “Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Vide Order Dated 08.05.2024, Which In Turn Assessment Order Passed By Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department / Assessing Officer Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 54G

Manoj Kumar Ekambaram Arcot, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1730/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar .S.V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT-DR

Section 234ASection 54Section 54B

Tarun Kumar Ratan Singh Rathi, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 32(1), Mumbai

ITA 2695/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54

Meka Ranganayakamma, Krishna District vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 119/VIZ/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Sri Madhukar Aves, Sr. AR

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 50GSection 54G

Everest Industries Ltd., Noida vs. Dy CIT Circle- 1, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas

ITA 717/MUM/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2006-07 Everest Industries Ltd., Dcit, Circle-1, D-206, Sector-63, Noida- Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- Vs. 201301, Uttar Pradesh, India. Wing 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane (W)-400 604. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Circle-1, Everest Industries Ltd., Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, B- G-1, A-32, Genesis Mohan Vs. Wing 16-Z, Wagle Industrial Coop. Industries, Mathura Estate, Thane (W)-400 604. Road, New Delhi-110044. Pan No. Aaace 7550 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar a/w Mr. Chaitanya JoshiFor Respondent: Mr. Alok Kumar, CIT-DR