BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

3 results for “capital gains”+ Section 234Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi248Mumbai233Jaipur86Bangalore86Hyderabad37Ahmedabad30Indore19Nagpur18Pune17Chennai16Kolkata14Ranchi13Amritsar11Jodhpur10Visakhapatnam9Patna8Guwahati5Jabalpur4Surat4Agra3Chandigarh3Rajkot3Lucknow2Allahabad1Dehradun1Raipur1

Key Topics

Section 1474Section 1484Section 234A3Addition to Income3Natural Justice3Section 69A2Cash Deposit2Deduction2

NITESH AGARWAL,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1)(3), AGRA

ITA 501/AGR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra20 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Accoutant Member Nitesh Agarwal Vs Income Tax 29/81, Lakshmi Palace, Officer-2(1) (3), Namakkimandi, Agra- Agra 282003 Pan No Abnpa2197G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 178Section 234ASection 234BSection 250(6)

Capital Gain of Rs.9,02,439 /- in Return of Income filed which was filed electronically. BECAUSE, in any case and in any view of the matter impugned addition and impugned assessment order is bad in law, illegal, unjustified, contrary to facts and law based upon incorrect assumption of facts and further without allowing adequate opportunity of hearing in violation

RADHA GUPTA,KALA MAHAL, AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1)(3), , AGRA

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 102/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 69A

234A &234B is incorrectly charged.” 3. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 2 | P a g e 4. It next emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned lower authorities have made section 69A addition of Rs.1,51,04,500/- in assessee’s hands thereby rejecting

GIREESH CHANDRA,ETAH vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), ETAH, ETAH

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 264/AGR/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 which was completed without complying with the requirement of law or taking proper approval. 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (NFAC) has erred in law and on facts to uphold the impugned order passed by the learned Assessing Officer even when the assessing officer acted