This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws

S. 56: Income from other sources-Agricultural land-Capital gains-Full value of consideration-Stamp valuation-Agricultural land is also covered under section 56 (2)(x)-When the value of land is disputed, the Assessing Officer ought to have referred the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO)-Matter remanded. [S.2(14) 50C(2), 56(2)(10)]

Clayking Minerals LLP v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 1 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S.54F: Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Sale of shop in February, 2012-Booked flat in December, 2010-Purchase of residential Flat in April, 2016-Entitled to exemption if substantial payment for said flat was made during relevant period or within two years from date of sale of shop-Matter remanded. [S.45, 50C]

Saurabh Khanna. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 479 (Delhi) (Trib)

S.54F: Capital gains-Investment in a residential house–Purchases–Duplex-Single deed-Entitled to exemption. [S. 45]

Ratan Mahendra Jain. (Mrs) v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 58 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 54B: Capital gains-Land used for agricultural purposes-land sold was used for agricultural activities for the last two years immediately preceding the date of transfer-Sale proceeds were also utilised for purchase of another land, which was again used for agricultural purposes-Exemption cannot be denied on the ground that after sale land was declared as non-agricultural by Stamp Duty Officer.[S. 45]

ITO v. Ajaib Singh. (2025) 213 ITD 613 (Amritsar) (Trib.)

S. 50C: Capital gains-Full value of consideration-Stamp valuation-Third proviso-Difference between value determined by DVO and consideration declared by assessee was less than 5 per cent of sale consideration-Would be entitled to the safe harbour rule of 5 per cent as per third proviso to section 50C.[S. 45]

DCIT v. Tirupati Niryat (P.) Ltd. (2025) 213 ITD 513 (Kol) (Trib.)

S. 45: Capital gains-Land-Compulsorily acquired-Guarantor-Overdraft facility-Compensation was first credited to assessee’s account and then transferred to sister concern’s bank account to discharge its overdraft-Application of income and not diversion by overriding title-Capital gains were taxable in assessee’s hands.[S. 4]

Geotech Foundation and Constructions. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 565 (Cochin) (Trib.)

S. 45: Capital gains-Transfer of rights in plot of land-Following the order of the brother, the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh. [S. 147, 148]

Hemantkumar Gajanan Lad. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 366 (Pune) (Trib.)

S. 45: Capital gains-Sale of shares-Accommodation entries-Sale through registered stockbroker-Copies of contract note filed-Genuine transaction-Denial of exemption was not justified-Allowed exemption-Addition was deleted.[S. 10(38, 69A, 147, 148]

Sangita Ben Mardia. v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 210 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 45: Capital gains-Family settlement-Capital asset –Transfer-Gift-Relinquishment of possession-Civil suit-Compensation received assessable as capital gains and not income from other sources.[S. 2(14), 2(47), 54, 54EC, 56(2)]

Dharampal Saghera v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 69 (Chd.)(Trib.)

S. 44AD : Presumptive basis-Bogus purchases-Not under any obligation to explain individual entry of purchases-Gross receipts remained undisputed-Additions deleted.[S. 69C]

Lakshmanram Bheemaji Purohit v. ITO (2025) 213 ITD 507 (Bang) (Trib.)