BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

45 results for “capital gains”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,789Delhi2,966Chennai1,581Bangalore1,390Kolkata1,263Ahmedabad1,014Pune586Jaipur553Hyderabad510Chandigarh404Surat374Indore364Karnataka270Cochin250Raipur183Visakhapatnam146Lucknow127Cuttack114Nagpur111Rajkot108Calcutta100Guwahati80Amritsar72SC56Patna46Agra45Telangana45Panaji42Ranchi39Jodhpur29Dehradun22Jabalpur20Kerala12Varanasi11Allahabad11Rajasthan7Orissa4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Andhra Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana2Gauhati2D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Himachal Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 14855Section 10(38)33Section 14731Exemption28Addition to Income28Section 5427Section 54F19Section 6817Section 26317Section 143(3)

A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S VANDANA JAIN & RAMA BANSAL, MORENA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 169/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10(38)Section 153A

exemption U/s 10(38) of the Act has been denied solely on the ground that resultant gain is due to insider trading and benefit of law is available to persons who abide by the law and act as per law and without disputing the fact that (i) gain arising is long term capital

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S RAKESH SHIVHARE & NISHA MITTAL, MORENA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 117/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019

Showing 1–20 of 45 · Page 1 of 3

16
Long Term Capital Gains13
Capital Gains12
AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10(38)Section 153A

exemption U/s 10(38) of the Act has been denied solely on the ground that resultant gain is due to insider trading and benefit of law is available to persons who abide by the law and act as per law and without disputing the fact that (i) gain arising is long term capital

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SHYAM SUNDER & MANISH TAORI, MORENA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 124/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10(38)Section 153A

exemption U/s 10(38) of the Act has been denied solely on the ground that resultant gain is due to insider trading and benefit of law is available to persons who abide by the law and act as per law and without disputing the fact that (i) gain arising is long term capital

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SUNIL KUMAR MITTAL & MAMTA MITTAL, MORENA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 128/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10(38)Section 153A

exemption U/s 10(38) of the Act has been denied solely on the ground that resultant gain is due to insider trading and benefit of law is available to persons who abide by the law and act as per law and without disputing the fact that (i) gain arising is long term capital

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2,, AGRA vs. M/S SAKSHI TAIRI & CHHAYA BATTAD, MORENA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 170/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10(38)Section 153A

exemption U/s 10(38) of the Act has been denied solely on the ground that resultant gain is due to insider trading and benefit of law is available to persons who abide by the law and act as per law and without disputing the fact that (i) gain arising is long term capital

ALAUDDIN,AGRA vs. ITO, WARD 1(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 241/AGR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra20 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 2(14)Section 250Section 54

exemption of capital gains. Admittedly, the assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 54 of the Act in respect of capital gains

PRAMOD KUMAR DUBEY,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,1(3), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 314/AGR/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Sept 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: BEFORE, SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manuj Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 111ASection 112ASection 112A(6)Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 87A

capital gains covered under section 111A, must be construed in favour of the assessee, in accordance with the settled principle of strict interpretation of exemption

ITO 1(2), GWALIOR vs. SMT REENA AGRAWAL, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 161/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 54Section 54F

capital gains of Rs.99,95,501/- u/s. 54F arising on account of sale of 20238 and 4762 equity shares of Rs.10/- each of M/s. R.P. Edible Oils Ltd. To Respectively @ 420/- each for Rs.84,99,960/- and Rs.20,00,040/- on 29.03.2012 and 17.02.2012 respectively. It is the case of the assessee before us that the assessee had claimed exemption

RAGHUVENDRA KUMAR VARSHNEY,ALIGARH vs. I.T.O., WARD-1, ALIGARH

In the result appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 106/AGR/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Agra31 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 147Section 148Section 234B

Capital Gain; that the reasons recorded itself says sale of 5 Flats for Rs.36 Lacs and the issue of including 15 Flats would arise if the income was taken under the head of Business; that the exemption

ABC PAPER PRODUCTS,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(1) AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 146/AGR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)

exempt under RFCTLARR Act, 2013.\n8. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the\norders of the lower authorities and submits that since the land\nacquired is not an agricultural land, therefore, the case of the\nassessee is not covered RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and the compensation\nis taxable as capital gain

AARA AGRO PVT. LTD.,AGRA vs. DY.CIT., CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AGRA

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 54/AGR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenalt.A No. 54/Agr/2021 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Vs. Cit Circle-2 (1)(1) Agra Agro Private Limited Agra U.P. Anjana Cinema, 3/2 D.M.G. Road Agra U.P. 282007 Pan: Aagca8595F (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 207Section 234BSection 234C

CAPITAL GAINS IN MARCH 2018 THEREFORE THE ADVANCE TAX LIABILITY AROSE ONLY IN MARCH. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED ON 17 MAY 2019 CHARGING INTEREST US 234C.THE APPELLANT INSTEAD OF FILING APPEAL PREFER TO FILE RECTIFICATION REQUEST AT CPC ON 9 JUNE 2019. THE RECTIFICATION ORDER RECEIVED ON EMAIL ON 21 FEB 2020 SEEN ON 2/3/2020. THE APPEAL FILED IS DELAYED

SARITA AGRAWAL,GWALIOR vs. ACIT, GWALIOR

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

ITA 170/AGR/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra14 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarmrs. Sarita Agrawal Acit Geeta Colony Aayakar Bhawan Dal Bazar, Gwalior- V. City Centre 474001 Gwalior-474001 Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adxpk3445P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 153A

capital gain on sale of shares ,and the income was claimed as exempt from income-tax. The assessee was asked

SURESH CHANDRA SADH,NEW DELHI vs. CIRCLE 4(1)(1),, ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 178/AGR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 68

Capital Gain. The AO has never linked transactions of the assessee to any scam related to bogus LTCG, as alleged in the light of the investigation carried out by the Directorate of Investigation. The AO has failed to appreciate that all the conditions required for claiming exemption

NEETA AGARWAL,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 2(1)(2), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing) Neeta Agarwal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-23, New Agra, Agra Ward-2(1)(2), Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaxpa0936E Assessee By : Shri Amit Goyal, Adv Shri Nitin Goyal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goyal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 234BSection 271(1)Section 68Section 69C

exempt, arose on sale of listed company M/s Capital Trade Link Ltd. The learned AO, based on the information that he had received that M/s Capital Trade Link Ltd. was a penny stock and Assessee was one of the beneficiaries of a fictitious accommodation entry of long-term capital gains

GURDEEP SINGH,AGRA vs. PR.CIT.-1,, AGRA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 31/AGR/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmagurdeep Singh Vs. The Pr. Cit-1 33, Laxmi Nagar, Sikandra, Agra Agra, Uttar Pradesh-282007 Pan No. Aflps 7500 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anil Verma, Adv. Revenue By Shri Surendra Pal, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 11.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2023

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 45Section 54F

exemption u/s 54F of the I.T. Act. 1961 on the strength of the investments made in purchasing the two plots and construction of building thereupon. As per the provisions of section 54F of the Act, if capital gain

SHRI BASANT MAKHIJA,GWALIOR vs. A.C.I.T. CIRCLE-I, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeals and Cross objection are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 23/AGR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54Section 548Section 54B

exemption u/s. 54 in para 4 to the following effect : Issue of disallowing the rebate/exemption from long term capital gain

SATISH PRAKASH AGARWAL,AGRA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2)(1), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 113/AGR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

exemption u/s 10(2A). The aforesaid loss of Rs. 10,06,265/- has arisen from set off of interest paid on loans raised by the assessee from ICICI Bank and private parties to be set off against the income from remuneration from the partnership firm Freedom Shoes LLP and interest income from capital invested in partnership firm Freedom Shoes

ANIL KUMAR GOYAL HUF,FIROZABAD vs. ITO WARD-5(1), FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 189/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra30 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year:2012-13

Section 54Section 54F

capital gain of Rs.91,95,570/- was accrued to the assessee after deduction of the cost of indexation. 2.1 The assessee had claimed exemption

GOVIND SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(1), MATHURA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 428/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Apr 2026AY 2015-16
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

Capital Gain of Rs.51,82,545/- as exempt income under section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Based

RUBY JAIN,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1)(3), AGRA

In the result, the questions referred to us are answered as follows :

ITA 128/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshruby Jain, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 1/78A, Kale Ka Tall, Delhi Ward-1(1)(3), Gate, Agra Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aevpj4936P Assessee By : Shri K. K. Jain, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

exemption of long-term capital gains or short-term capital loss to various persons by converting their unaccounted income into