Which cases are most cited on Section 63?

Smt. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim v. CIT (204 ITR 631) — 197 citing judgments; Ex Japan) Analyst Fund (2014) 61 SOT 277 and Capital International Emerging Markets Funs v. DIT (145 ITD 491) — 11 citing judgments; Behramji Sorabji Lalkaka v. CIT (16 ITR 301) — 8 citing judgments; Ltd. vs. ADIT (2009) (132 TTJ 218); Fidelity Investment Trust Fidelity Overseas Fund v. ADIT (36 SOT 22) — 4 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 63?

BharatTax indexes 92 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 63 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 63 of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 63 of the Income Tax Act?

Smt. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim v. CIT (204 ITR 631) is the decision most relied on for Section 63, cited in 197 judgments. The determinative test for whether land is agricultural land or a capital asset is its actual user for agricultural purposes, not merely ownership. An explicit intention to stop cultivation or convert the land to non-agricultural use can cause it to lose its agricultural character, making its sale proceeds chargeable to capital gains tax.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.98

Section 63 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 98 (“Transfer” and “revocable transfer” defined) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 98 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 63 is Smt. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim v. CIT (204 ITR 631), cited in 197 of the 92 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 63

Smt. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim v. CIT

204 ITR 631 · 1993 · Supreme Court

197

citing judgments

The determinative test for whether land is agricultural land or a capital asset is its actual user for agricultural purposes, not merely ownership. An explicit intention to stop cultivation or convert the land to non-agricultural use can cause it to lose its agricultural character, making its sale proceeds chargeable to capital gains tax.

Ex Japan) Analyst Fund (2014) 61 SOT 277 and Capital International Emerging Markets Funs v. DIT

145 ITD 491 · 2013 · ITAT

citing judgments

The decision in ADIT vs Legg Mason Sia (Ex Japan) Analyst Fund and Capital International Emerging Markets Funs vs DIT supports the assessee where non-STT paid funds are concerned.

Behramji Sorabji Lalkaka v. CIT

16 ITR 301 · 1948 · High Court

citing judgments

Ltd. vs. ADIT (2009) (132 TTJ 218); Fidelity Investment Trust Fidelity Overseas Fund v. ADIT

36 SOT 22 · ITAT

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 63

Sri Tripura Bhairavi Mutt vs. State of Karnataka

WP/9173/2012HC Karnataka03 Jan 2013

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY

Section 66

Sri Tripura Bhairavi Mutt vs. State of Karnataka

In the result, petition stands dismissed

WP/41048/2011HC Karnataka22 Nov 2012

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh Writ Petition 41048 / 2011 (Lr) Between Sri Tripura Bhairavi Mutt By Its Mahanth – Sri K Krishna Mohananda Giri Goswamy, 48 Yrs Ashoka Road, Mysore Petitioner (By Sri Padubidri Mohan Rao, Adv.) & 1 State Of Karnataka – By Its Secretary Revenue Department, Vidhana Soudha Bangalore 2 Land Tribunal, Nanjangud Taluk By Its Chairman 3 Sri Bhishma Pitamaha, 90 Yrs S/O Maniram Sharma 4 Sri Kuldeep Prakash, 42 Yrs S/Osri Bhisma Pitamaha 5 Smt Shobha Devi, 50 Yrs W/O Sudhir Mishra

Central Govt.Emp. Consumer Coo vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Appeal is dismissed and pending applications

ITA/407/2007HC Delhi19 Sept 2008

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

Section 35Section 40Section 63Section 8(1)

Dalmia Cement Ltd., Rajasthan vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi

CIVIL APPEAL No. 4632/1992Supreme Court16 Apr 1999

Bench: Actual Accrual-Assessee Not Able To Retain The Profits After Sale Agreement-Thus, Profits Not Taxable In The Hands Of Assessee. Ss. 60 & 63--Applicability Of. Income Tax-Profits Of Business-Accrual Of-Held, Profits Do Not Accrue E From Day To Day But At The End Of The Accounting Year. Words & Phrases "Transfer "-Meaning & Scope Of In The Context Of S. 63 Of The Income F Tax Act, 1961. Appellant-Ass.Essee, By An Agreement Dated 24.7.1962 Agreed To Sell & Transfer Its Two Cement Factories To One 'M'. Subsequently, Supplemental Agreement Dated 2 •. 11.1962 Was Entered Into Between The Parties Stipulating In Clause 3 That The Profits & Loss Arising From The Two Factories Subsequent G To 30.9.1962 Shall Go To The Account Of Transferee. The Agreement Was Extended From Time To Time & Ultimately, On 30.9.1964, The Parties Entered Into A Sale Deed. Assessee Filed His Income-Tax Return For The Assessment Periods 1.10.1962 To 30.9.1963 & 1.10.1963 To 30.9.1964 Excluding The Profits Arising Out Of The Said Two Cement Factories. The Income-Tax Officer Rejecting The Said Returns, Passed An Assessment Order By Including The H 735

Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Lilavati Lalbhai

Of transfer of land in question which is held to be

ITR/88/1984HC Gujarat19 Nov 1998

Section 2(14)Section 63

S. Rm. M.Ct. M. Tiruppani Trust vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

CIVIL APPEAL No. 1699/1984Supreme Court04 Feb 1998

Bench: 2 Judges

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 256(1)

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. H.H. Maharaja Fatesingh Familytrust No.1

ITR/252/1983HC Gujarat07 Jan 1997

Section 60

Smt. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim and Ors vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gujarat

Accordingly fail and are dismissed

CIVIL APPEAL No. 4001/1982Supreme Court14 Sept 1993

Bench: 2 Judges

Commissioner of Income-Tax Bombay City-III, Bombay vs. Shantilal Private Limited Bombay

TAX REFERENCE CASE No. 4/1978Supreme Court21 Jul 1983

Bench: 3 Judges

Section 257Section 43

Commissioner of Income-Tax, Punjab vs. Daulat Ram Khanna

CIVIL APPEAL No. 580/1966Supreme Court29 Mar 1967

Bench: 3 Judges

Section 34

E. M. Muthappa Chettiar vs. The Income-Tax Officer Special Circle, Coimbatore

CIVIL APPEAL No. 107/1956Supreme Court21 Sept 1960

Bench: 5 Judges

M/S. Maharana Mills (Private) Ltd vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Porbandar

CIVIL APPEAL No. 39/1959Supreme Court14 Apr 1959

Bench: Us On April 2, 1959, We Had Announced Our Decis!On · That The Appeal Would Be Allowed & That The Judgment Would Be Delivered Later On In Due Eourse. It Is In Pursuance Of That Order That The Pre- Sent Judgment Has Been Delivered. Appeal Allowed. M/S. Maharana Mills (Private) Ltd. V. The Income-Tax Officer, Porbandar (B. P. Sinha, J. L. Kapur & M. Hrnayatullah, Jj.) Income Tax-Depreciation-Written Down V Alue-C Amputa- Tion For Prior Years-Whether Binding For Succeeding Years-Fresh Calculation For Written Down Value By Income-Tax Officer-Notice To Assessee-When Essential-Indian Income-Tax Act, R922 (Xi Of R922), Ss. Ro(Z)(Vi), 35(R), 63, Sub-Section (R) Of S. 35 Of The Indian Income-Tax Act, 1922, Provided: " .................. The Income-Tax Officer May ...... On His Own Motion Rectify Any Mistake Apparent From The Record ...... & Shall ...... Rectify Any Such Mistake Which Has Been Brought To His Notice By An Assessee: Provided That No Such Rectificatioa Shall Be Made, Having The Effect Of Enhancing Or Reducing A I959 April I4.

For Appellant: Provided that no such rectificatioa