Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2023 (10) TMI 1418 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Agricultural land sale qualifies for section 54B deduction despite advance payment timing issues ITAT Raipur allowed assessee's deduction u/s 54B for LTCG on agricultural land sale. Despite revenue's objection that new land was purchased after ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Agricultural land sale qualifies for section 54B deduction despite advance payment timing issues

                            ITAT Raipur allowed assessee's deduction u/s 54B for LTCG on agricultural land sale. Despite revenue's objection that new land was purchased after receiving sale advances, tribunal held that timing of actual investment payments relative to advance receipts was irrelevant, following CBDT Circular 359 and judicial precedents. Tribunal found non-notarized documents were irregular but not false, and banking channel evidence supported genuineness. Regarding addition u/s 68 for secured loans, tribunal dismissed revenue's challenge but remanded matter to AO for verification of loan repayment details as new facts required examination.




                            Issues Involved:

                            1. Deletion of addition on account of deduction claimed under Section 54B.
                            2. Deletion of addition under Section 68 regarding unsecured loans.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Deletion of Addition on Account of Deduction Claimed under Section 54B:

                            The primary issue revolves around whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 91,80,111/- claimed under Section 54B of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had sold agricultural land and claimed a deduction under Section 54B for purchasing new agricultural land. The AO disallowed the deduction on the grounds that the new land was purchased before the sale of the old land, contrary to the provisions of Section 54B, which require the purchase to be made after the sale.

                            The CIT(A) observed that the land at Sejbahar was sold on 30/03/2015, and the sale consideration was received on various dates from 02/09/2014 to 15/09/2016. The assessee had taken loans to purchase the new land and repaid these loans from the sale proceeds. The CIT(A) referred to the Mumbai Tribunal's decision in the case of Inshar Singh Chawada vs. DCIT and the Bombay High Court's decision in CIT vs. Dr. P.S. Pasricha, which allowed deductions under similar circumstances.

                            The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the advances received from the sale of the old land were used to purchase the new land. The Tribunal also referred to CBDT Circular No. 359, which clarified that investments made from earnest money or advances received before the date of transfer qualify for exemption under Section 54B. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's grounds on this issue.

                            2. Deletion of Addition under Section 68 Regarding Unsecured Loans:

                            The second issue pertains to the addition of Rs. 1,25,21,000/- under Section 68, which the AO treated as unexplained credits. The AO doubted the genuineness and creditworthiness of the unsecured loans received by the assessee, despite the assessee providing confirmations, ITR acknowledgments, and bank statements.

                            The CIT(A) deleted the addition, noting that the AO did not make any inquiries to disprove the documents provided by the assessee. The CIT(A) cited the Delhi High Court's decision in Russian Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd., which held that the AO should have inquired into the veracity of the documents if not convinced. The CIT(A) also referred to the Bombay High Court's decision in Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs. CIT and the Chhattisgarh High Court's decision in Pawan Kumar Agrawal vs. ITO, which stated that the onus to prove the creditworthiness of third parties lies with the department if the assessee has provided sufficient documentation.

                            The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) but remanded the matter back to the AO for verification of the repayment of the loans, as new facts regarding the repayment were presented during the appeal. The Tribunal instructed the AO to verify the correctness and veracity of the repayment details provided by the assessee.

                            Conclusion:

                            The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition under Section 54B, affirming that the assessee had appropriately claimed the deduction. For the addition under Section 68, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the AO for limited verification of the repayment details, thereby partly allowing the revenue's appeal for statistical purposes.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found