Section 64(1A) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.99

Section 64(1A) falls under section 64 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 99 (Income of individual to include income of spouse, minor child, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 99 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

43 judgments on BharatTax turn on Section 64(1A).

Judgments on Section 64(1A)

Arihant Patni, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 7, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 442/PUN/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 64

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 7, Pune vs. Apoorva Ashokkumar Patni, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 421/PUN/2020[2017-20189]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2022

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 64

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -7, Pune vs. Arihant Patni, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 419/PUN/2020[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 64

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -7, Pune vs. Shruti Arihant Patni, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 569/PUN/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 64

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -7, Pune vs. Arihant Patni, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 568/PUN/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 64

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -7, Pune vs. Apoorva Ashokkumar Patni, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 567/PUN/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 64

Vijay Vasantrao Mahadik, Pune vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Range -2, Pune

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 603/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Vijay Vasantrao Mahadik Vs. Addl.Cit, 15, Acacia Garden Phase – Ii, Range 2, Pune Vasant Vaibhav, Magarpatta City, Hadapsar, Pune. Pan : Aiipm2613B Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 64Section 68

Shri Gaurav Agarwal, Lucknow vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-I, Lucknow

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 584/LKW/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A.D Jain & Shri T.S. Kapoorassessment Year 2017-18 Gaurav Agarwal, Dcit, 3/3 Gulmohar Enclave, Vs. Central Circle-1, Gokhle Marg, Lucknow Lucknow Pan – Adjpa4408J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 56Section 56(1)(vii)Section 56(2)(vii)

Bhaskari Madhavan, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward-19(4), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 572/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.572/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Mrs. Bhaskari Madhavan, Vs Income Tax Officer, 6,Chellam Homes, First Floor, Non-Corporate Ward-19(4), Kuberan Nagar, Velacherry, Chennai. Chennai-600 042. Pan: Afipb 6629M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. AR V.Sreenivasan, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 30.03.2022
Section 147Section 148Section 54

Apoorva Sharma, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-6(4), Jaipur

ITA 219/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Oct 2021AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 64

ITO, Ward - 23(2), Hooghly vs. Shri Navaratan Dugar, Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2255/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2255/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Baij Nath Singh, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 64Section 68

Nagarajan Shanmugam, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1803/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT (D.R)

Waheeda Asif Abbas, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

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

ITA 3354/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3354/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, JCIT
Section 54FSection 64

T vs. Credit Services Limited, Chennai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas that of cross objection of the assessee is party allowed

ITA 998/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Smt.T.V.Muthu Abirami, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 194ASection 201Section 251(1)Section 40

Kalpana Sundar, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corporate Ward-8(1), Chennai

ITA 2153/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2153/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 Smt. Kalpana Sundar, The Income Tax Officer, No. 4/3, Sri Janakas, 2Nd Cross Vs. Non-Corporate Ward 8(1), Street, East Kamakodi Nagar, Chennai. Valasaravakkam, Chennai 600 087. [Pan:Cnvps4092J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar. V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai Dated 28.07.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of The Claim Of Tax Exemption Under Section 54 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR. V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 54Section 54FSection 64

Anuj S. Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 16(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 377/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N. K. Pradhan, Am Shri Anuj S. Shah, 6A, 1St Floor, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Anand Mahal, Babulnath Road, Range 16(2) (4), Mumbai 400 007 Mumbai- 400 007 Pan:Bjpds 3198C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By .. Ms. Kshipra Singhvi, Ar Respondent By .. Shri Ravi Ramchandran, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing .. 14-10-2016 .. Date Of Pronouncement 14- 10- 2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Cit (A)-27, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)-27/16(2)(4)/461/2011-12 Dated 28-10-2013. Assessment Was Framed By The Ito, Ward 16(2)(4), Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Vide His Order Dated 23-12-2011 U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’). 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Cit (A) In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Assessing The Sale Consideration Of The Gold Bars As Income From Other Sources As Against The Claim Of The Assessee As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. At The Outset, It Is Noticed That The Assessee While Filing Memo Of Appeal Has Filed Incomplete Assessment Order I.E. Page 4 Of The Assessment Order Is Missing. When Query Was Put To The Learned Counsel Of The Assessee, She Filed A Copy Of Letter No.Ito 19 (1) (1)/Rti/Anuj S Shah/ 2016-17 Dated 10-05-2010 Whereby The Ito, Ward -19 (1) (1), Mumbai Has Supplied Information Under Right To Information Act On The Application Of The Assessee Whereby He Has Again Supplied Incomplete Assessment Order I.E. Page 4 Of The Assessment Was Missing. When The Records Were Called For From The Assessment Order Also, It Is Noticed That The Relevant Page 4 Whereby Finding Of The Ao Is Recorded Is Also Missing. In Such Circumstances, We Have Proceeded To Decide The Issue In The Absence Of 2 Findings Of The Ao, Which Is On Page 4 & Which Is Missing, But Based On Material Available Before Us.

Section 143(3)Section 64

M/S. Capable Commercials P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO - 3(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6195/MUM/2006[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

Section 143Section 271Section 64

Santosh Sumatilal Mutha, Navi Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. 22(3), Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA N0

ITA 4320/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4320/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Mr. Santosh Sumatilal Acit 22 (3), बनाम/ Mutha, 3 Rd Floor, Tower No. 6, V. C- 1201, Gunina Vashi Railway Station Apartments, Complex, Near Moraj Residency, Vashi, Sanpada, Navi Mumbai 400 703. Navi Mumbai – 400 705. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abipm1279J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

P.V.Gopalakrishna, Vellore vs. ACIT, Vellore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 2254/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 45Section 54E

Ms. Deepika Chopra, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed

ITA 6751/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shrayam Gptri, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 64