Section 55(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.90

Section 55(2) falls under section 55 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 90 (Meaning of “adjusted”, “cost of improvement” and “cost of acquisition”) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 90 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 55(2) is CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty (128 ITR 294), cited in 628 of the 80 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 55(2)

CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty
128 ITR 294 · 1981 · Supreme Court
628
citing judgments

When the cost of acquisition of a capital asset cannot be determined, the computation mechanism for capital gains fails, and thus no capital gains can be charged. This establishes a broader principle that a charging section cannot operate in the absence of specific machinery provisions for computation.

PCIT v. Smt. Vidhi Agarwal
88 Taxmann.com 306 · 2017 · High Court
5
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 55(2)

Hathway Cable and Datacom Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2322/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 14ASection 55(2)Section 55(2)(aa)

Swadeshi Polytex Ltd, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-22(4), New Delhi

ITA 5592/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmam/S. Swadeshi Polytex Limited Vs. Ito, A-1, Sector-17, Ward-22(4), Kavi Nagar, Industrial Area, New Delhi Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201002 Pan: Aalcs4058E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 50C

Nalini Mahajan, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-61(1), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3130/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

Section 28Section 28(1)Section 55(2)

Dy. CIT-10(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Lyka Labs Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 3175/MUM/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Dadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 55(2)

Dy. CIT-10(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Lyka Labs Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 2050/MUM/2019[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Dadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 55(2)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 10(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Lyka Labs Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2934/MUM/2019[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit – 10(2)(1) Vs. M/S. Lyka Labs Ltd., 5Th Floor, Room No. Ground Floor, Spencer 509, Aayakar Bhavan, Bldg, 30, Forjett Street. Churchgate, Grant Road(West), Mumbai -400036. Mumbai -400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacl0820G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Smt.Shailja Rai. Cit Dr Respondent By : Shri .Jayesh Dadia. Ar Date Of Hearing 28.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -17, Mumbai Passed U/S 271(1)(C) & 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Smt.Shailja Rai. CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri .Jayesh Dadia. AR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 55(2)

ITO 25(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Kirit Raojibhai Patel, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned AO is dismissed

ITA 2339/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Sri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm The Income Tax Officer- Kirit Raojibhai Patel 25(2)(5) 5Th Floor Ram Niwas, 34, Room No. 506, C-10, Vallabhnagar, N.S. Road, Vs. Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bkc, Juhu, Vile Parele(W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabpp3139J Assessee Represented By : Shri Rashmikant Choksey, Ar Department Represented By : Shri K.K. Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2022

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2Section 45Section 50Section 54Section 54F

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Kolkata vs. Smt. Shikha Roy

ITAT/162/2021HC Calcutta08 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 54ESection 54F

Avtar Singh Dheeran, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 66(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 403/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2014-15 Avtar Singh Dheeran, Vs Ito, C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, Ward-66(5), G-26/124, Sector-7, New Delhi. Rohini, New Delhi. Pan: Aaipd8887G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.04.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.06.2021 Order

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Moha Narendra Gandhi, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(5), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1156/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Deviassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri A SrinivasFor Respondent: Sri Sandeep Kumar Mehta, DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 49Section 54BSection 54ESection 55(2)

Deepa Sachin Sankhe, Thane vs. ITO WD 1, Palghar

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

ITA 5784/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deepa Sachin Sankhe Income Tax Officer, Ward- C/O M N Nandgaonkar, Vs. 1, Bidco Road, Palghar Chartered Accountant, West-401608. 1, Chandralok, Veer Savarkarm Marg, Tembhi Naka, Thane West-400601. Pan No. Awdps2312J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. M.N. Nandgaonkar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. V. Vinod Kumar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 45Section 48Section 50C

Ajay Indrajit Thakore, Mumbai vs. ACIT 11(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6602/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ajay I. ThakoreFor Respondent: Shri S. Michael Jerald
Section 144ASection 49(1)Section 50ESection 55(2)Section 55(2)(ii)

Neelu Analjit Singh, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-9, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed with above directions

ITA 2172/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishimrs. Neelu Analjit Singh, Vs. The Addl. Commissioner Of 15, Dr. Apj Abdul Kalam Road, Income Tax , New Delhi Special Range-9, Pan: Aatps06882D New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Senior
Section 2Section 45

Venkateswara Vara Prasad Rao Karipineni, Kakinada vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 178/VIZ/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.Manoj Kumar, DR
Section 49(1)

DCIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai vs. Bharat Barrel & Drums Mfg. Co. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2454/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri N.S. Jangpangi, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri H.S. Raheja, AR
Section 143(3)Section 48

Asstt.CIT, Cir.1, Nashik vs. Shri Rajan Bhalchandra Datar, Nashik

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

ITA 427/PUN/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 427/Pun/2011 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nashik. .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay DhardeFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad
Section 55Section 55(2)Section 55(2)(a)

Income Tax Officer 25(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Deepak Talakshi Shah, Mumbai

ITA 4838/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Satish Modi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari, D.R
Section 2(14)Section 50C

Shri Laxmanbhai Jivrajbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 421/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 421/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 ) बनाम/ Laxmanbhai Jivrajbhai Patel The Dcit M/S.Shree Krishna Vijay Saw Circle-5(3) Vs. Mills Ahmedabad Lati Gbazar Zone-3 Geeta Mandir Ahmedabad-380 022 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abhpp 3999 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.J. Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Nilam Das Gupta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 08/05/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 17/06/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–5, Ahmedabad [Cit(A) In Short] Vide Appeal No.Cit(A)-5/Dcit Cir.5(3)/10530/2017-18 Dated 08/12/2017 Arising In The Assessment Order Passed Under S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 16/02/2016 Relevant To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- Laxmanbhai Jivrajbhai Patel Vs.Dcit Asst.Year - 2013-14 1. The Cit(Appeals) Erred In Not Granting Deduction Of Rs.94,90,000/- Paid Towards Cancellation Of Banakhat While Computing The Short Term Capital Gains, Which Arose On Sale Of Agricultural Land. The Appellant Reserves Its Right To Add, Amend, Alter Or Modify Any Of The Grounds Stated Hereinabove Either Before Or At The Time Of Hearing. The Only Issue Raised By The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Not Granting The Deduction Amounting To Rs. 94,90,000/- Paid Towards Cancellation Of Banakhat Against The Income Under The Head Capital Gain.

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilam Das Gupta, Sr.DR

Bharat Serums and Vacciness Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 4701/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4701/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07) M/S. Bharat Serums & बिधम/ Acit, Circle 3(1) Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, Vaccines Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- 17Th Floor, Hoechst House, 400020. Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala & NiteshFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev K. Gubgotra (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 41(3)Section 55(2)Section 55B

Shri Satish Keshrichand Shah, Nani Daman vs. The Income Tax Officer, Vapi Ward-4, Daman

The appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1262/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 143(1)