This compilation indexes twelve rulings from Indian courts and tribunals — spanning the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, multiple High Courts, and the Allahabad High Court's Lucknow Bench — in which Section 55 was among the sections cited or engaged. The cases span the period October 2023 to June 2026 and arise across a diverse range of subject-matter contexts including capital gains computation, property transactions, commercial disputes, and prosecution sanction proceedings. This index is intended for use by in-house tax teams, Big-4 associates, and law firm researchers who require a structured starting point for further case-specific research.

Research index only. This page is a structured case-law reference compiled for research purposes. Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice, tax advice, or a recommendation of any kind. Always verify against the full judgment text and consult a qualified professional before acting on any information.

The statutory framework in one paragraph

Section 55 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 primarily addresses the meaning of "adjusted cost" and the cost of acquisition for the purposes of computing capital gains under Chapter IV-E. It prescribes how the cost of acquisition of certain assets — including goodwill, tenancy rights, route permits, loom hours, and assets acquired before specific cut-off dates — is to be determined, including deeming provisions that treat the cost of acquisition as nil in specified circumstances. The section also contains provisions relating to the cost of improvement of capital assets. Separately, Section 55 appears in other Indian statutes — including the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 — where it carries a distinct meaning relevant to prosecution sanction; researchers should take care to identify which enactment's Section 55 is engaged in any given ruling.

The 12 rulings

1. Gpfe Housing Co-Op Society vs Assessing Officer, Bangalore

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore
Date: 30 June 2026
Sections engaged: 148, 48, 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The appeal (ITA No. 827/Bang/2026, Assessment Year 2015-16, PAN AABAG 9812 A) was filed by GPFE Housing Co-operative Society against the order of the NFAC, Delhi passed under Section 250 of the Act dated 09.02.2026. Ground Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of the appeal were not pressed by the assessee and were accordingly dismissed as not pressed; Ground No. 4 raised the issue that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the computation of capital gain by taking the cost of acquisition at NIL, engaging the provisions of Sections 48 and 55.

2. 52 Realtors vs Rumi Keki Palia

Bench: Bombay High Court
Date: 7 May 2026
Sections engaged: 54, 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The matter came before the Bombay High Court as Commercial Arbitration Petition (L) No. 16572 of 2026, with disputes and differences having arisen between the parties out of an agreed monetary arrangement. The petition was ultimately dismissed, per the source preview (paragraph 15: "The Petition is accordingly dismissed").

3. Sidramappa Danigond Memorial Trust vs The State Of Karnataka

Bench: Karnataka High Court
Date: 17 November 2025
Sections engaged: 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The writ petition (WP No. 101312 of 2024) was filed before the Karnataka High Court at Dharwad under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing certain communications. The petitioner, Sidramappa Danigond Memorial Trust Terdal, was represented by its Chairman; respondents included the State of Karnataka through the Department of Urban Development, the Director of Municipal Administration, the Deputy Commissioner Bagalkot, and the Town Municipal Council Terdal.

4. Kriti Nutrients Ltd vs M/S Rajlakshmi Oils

Bench: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Date: 6 October 2025
Sections engaged: 135, 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: Two miscellaneous appeals (M.A. No. 5004/2023 and M.A. No. 5126/2023) involving Kriti Nutrients Ltd. and M/S Rajlakshmi Oils were heard analogously before the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore and decided by a common order, given the similitude in the controversy involved. M.A. No. 5004/2023 was filed under Order 43 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, read with Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, per the source preview.

5. Dineshkumar Mohanlal Thakkar vs Hemant Rajnikant Shah

Bench: Gujarat High Court
Date: 15 September 2025
Sections engaged: 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The matter was heard as R/Appeal from Order No. 222 of 2024 (with Civil Application for Stay No. 1 of 2024) before the Gujarat High Court at Ahmedabad. Per the source preview, the present application was filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, and with the consent of the advocates for both parties the matter was taken up for final hearing.

6. M/S. Castrol India Limited vs The State Of Jharkhand

Bench: Jharkhand High Court
Date: 3 April 2025
Sections engaged: 35(6), 55, 79
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The writ petition (W.P. (T) No. 7091 of 2023) was filed by M/s. Castrol India Limited before the Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi against the State of Jharkhand and officials of the Commercial Taxes Department including the State Tax Officer, Deputy Commissioner, Additional Commissioner, and Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Jamshedpur Circle. The source preview is procedural in nature and does not disclose the substantive ground beyond identifying the parties and the tax administration context.

7. Muthoot Finance Limited vs Union Of India

Bench: Kerala High Court
Date: 18 October 2024
Sections engaged: 142(3), 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: This writ appeal (W.A. No. 1651 of 2024) was filed by Muthoot Finance Limited before the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam, aggrieved by the judgment dated 03.09.2024 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 28282 of 2022. The appeal was filed against the Union of India and the Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax and Central Excise, Ernakulam Division, and was finally heard and decided on 18.10.2024.

8. Vikas Sharma vs Hemant Sharma And Anr

Bench: Himachal Pradesh High Court
Date: 2 September 2024
Sections engaged: 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The applicant/plaintiff filed Civil Suit No. 22 of 2023 (OMP No. 164 of 2023) seeking recovery of ₹3,97,75,000/- with interest at 12% per annum from the date of filing till realisation, and damages of ₹50,00,000/-; the applicant had executed a sale deed but the non-applicants/defendants failed to pay the balance sale consideration. The application sought an interim injunction restraining the non-applicants/defendants from alienating the suit property or creating any charge on it.

9. State Of Chhattisgarh vs Manoj Agrawal

Bench: Chattisgarh High Court
Date: 2 September 2024
Sections engaged: 20(b), 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The present matter (ACQA No. 418 of 2024) is an acquittal appeal preferred by the State of Chhattisgarh under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment of acquittal dated 27.01.2023 passed by the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Mahasamund in Special Criminal Case (NDPS Act) No. H-33/2017, whereby the respondent/accused was acquitted of the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act on the basis of benefit of doubt. This matter does not engage any income-tax statutory provision as its central subject; it is indexed here solely because Section 55 appears in the sections cited field per the source data.

10. Sandeep Miglani vs Union Of India Thru. Deputy

Bench: Allahabad High Court
Date: 4 June 2024
Sections engaged: 53, 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The petitioner filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Application No. 5145 of 2024) challenging the validity of an order dated 27.02.2024 of the IX Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Complaint Case No. 277 of 2024, whereby the trial court took cognizance of an offence under Section 53 read with Section 3 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988. The Union of India had filed the complaint through a Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax/Initiating Officer, Benami Prohibition Unit, Kanpur, after obtaining sanction for prosecution from the Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation) Kanpur under Section 55 of the Benami Act on 29.01.2024.

11. Dr.Ramila A. Sanghvi vs K.K.B.Properties And Anr. Shalaka

Bench: Bombay High Court
Date: 2 May 2024
Sections engaged: 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The matter arose as Notice of Motion (L) No. 9726 of 2022 in Insolvency Petition No. 18 of 2017, heard by the Bombay High Court in its Insolvency Jurisdiction. The parties included Shalaka Projects Private Limited as applicant, K.K.B. Properties and another as insolvents, Dr. Ramila A. Sanghvi as petitioning creditor ex-parte, and the Official Assignee of Bombay as respondent; the source preview is largely procedural in nature and does not disclose the substantive ground in detail.

12. Vidarbha Automobile Dealers vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. The

Bench: Bombay High Court
Date: 30 October 2023
Sections engaged: 2(25), 55
Outcome: Outcome not specified in source
Procedural / substantive ground: The writ petition (WP No. 4483 of 2022) was filed before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench by Vidarbha Automobile Dealers Association and several automobile dealership entities against the State of Maharashtra. The source preview identifies the petitioners as dealers registered under the Society Registration Act and as various private limited companies engaged in the automobile trade; the substantive ground is not disclosed in the available text preview beyond the party identification.

Patterns across these 12 rulings

Section 55 appears across multiple statutory regimes. Across the 12 rulings indexed, "Section 55" is invoked from at least two distinct statutes: the Income-tax Act, 1961 (capital gains cost of acquisition) and the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 (prosecution sanction). Researchers must confirm the governing statute before drawing substantive conclusions from any citation of Section 55 in isolation.
Cost of acquisition at NIL is a discrete income-tax flashpoint. In at least one ITAT ruling in this set (case 1, ITA No. 827/Bang/2026, AY 2015-16), the confirmed issue involved the correctness of taking cost of acquisition at NIL for capital gains computation purposes, which is among the most commonly litigated applications of the income-tax Section 55 provisions in tribunal proceedings.
The majority of text previews are procedural rather than substantive. Across most of the 12 rulings, the available source preview discloses party identification, court details, and procedural posture, but does not reveal the merits of the court's reasoning. This limits the ability to identify deeper substantive patterns at this stage; patterns will emerge as full judgment texts are added to the corpus.
Multi-forum spread without a single dominant court. The 12 rulings span the ITAT Bangalore, Bombay High Court (three benches), Karnataka High Court, Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gujarat High Court, Jharkhand High Court, Kerala High Court, Himachal Pradesh High Court, Chhattisgarh High Court, and Allahabad High Court — reflecting that Section 55 questions arise in litigation spread widely across the Indian judicial hierarchy rather than clustering in one forum.
Non-income-tax matters tagged with Section 55. At least two cases in this set (cases 9 and 4) appear on their face to engage non-income-tax statutory frameworks (NDPS Act and Trade Marks Act respectively) as their central subject matter, with Section 55 appearing as a cited section. Researchers should review the full judgment to determine whether the income-tax Section 55 is substantively engaged or whether the citation reflects a different enactment's provision.

How to use this compilation

This index is a structured starting point for locating rulings that cite Section 55 across Indian courts and the ITAT. Each entry above identifies the forum, date, sections engaged, and the procedural context drawn from the available source preview. To use this compilation effectively, researchers should retrieve the full judgment text from the source court portal or indiankanoon.org for each case of interest before drawing any conclusions about the court's holding, reasoning, or precedential value. The source preview available for each case in this index is truncated and in several instances does not expose the dispositive portions of the order.

Researchers should also verify whether any of these rulings have been stayed, appealed, modified, or reversed at a higher forum after the date of pronouncement listed. A ruling at the ITAT level may be subject to a pending High Court appeal; a High Court ruling may have been taken to the Supreme Court. The dates listed reflect the date of the order as recorded in the source data, not the date of any subsequent proceedings. Checking the current status of each matter through the relevant court's case-status portal is strongly recommended before relying on a ruling for any research purpose.

Finally, researchers should cross-check any ruling involving Section 55 against contemporaneous CBDT circulars, instructions, and notifications, particularly where the issue concerns the cost of acquisition of assets acquired before the commencement of the Income-tax Act, 1961, or assets subject to deeming provisions. CBDT guidance on fair market value determination as of relevant cut-off dates may bear directly on the issues in dispute in the income-tax cases indexed here.

Source

All cases listed above are drawn from the TaxNoticeAI structured legal corpus (16,101 Indian tax judgments, CBIC circulars, ITAT rulings, AAR rulings, GSTAT rulings), sourced from indiankanoon.org and official court portals.

Section 55 Across Indian Courts: 12 Rulings Index (2023–2026)