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.

5 results for “capital gains”+ Section 200Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai67Kolkata17Bangalore17Delhi13Surat11Mumbai10Ahmedabad5Rajkot4Indore3Jaipur2Jodhpur2Pune1SC1Hyderabad1

Key Topics

Section 234E23Section 200A22Section 143(1)4Section 1544Section 564Section 2004Section 246A3Section 2503TDS3Addition to Income

BLUE RIVER REALTY PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee are dismissed

ITA 36/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S.V. Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Shyam Prasad, Sr. D.R
Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234Section 234ESection 3

200A is not a source of substantive power. Substantive power to levy fee can be traced to section 234E of the Act. Further the fee under section 234E of the Act is not in lieu of the penalty of section 271H of the Act. Both are independent levies. Section 271H only provides that such penalty would not be levy

2
Rectification u/s 1542
Deduction2

G. B. BUILDERS, ,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT-CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 626/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Due Date On 24-11-2014, But Inadvertently Committed An Error Therein Of Depositing This Tds Using Pan Of The Seller Instead Of Pan Of The Appellant (As The Buyer)

For Appellant: Shri Hirak Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 194Section 194ISection 200Section 200ASection 234E

200A would bein I.T.A No. 626/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No. 7 G.B. Builders vs. ACIT-CPC(TDS) nature of clarificatory amendment. Even in absence of such provision, as noted, it was always open for the Revenue to charge the fee in terms of section 234E of the Act. ……. 27. counsel for the petitioner however, referred to the decision

ANUKOOL FURNITURE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CPC -TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 539/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years : 2015-16 Anukool Furniture Pvt Ltd Acit, B-12, Doctor House, Nr. Parimal Vs Cpc-Tds, Railway Crossing, Ellisbridge, Ghaziabad Ahmedabad-380006 Pan : Aabca 6053 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "त् यथ" "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "त् "त् यथ" यथ" Assessee By : Shri Bharat Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/11/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/11/2021 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Rajpal Yadav: The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad [“Cit(A) In Short] Dated 25Th January 2019 Passed For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Solitary Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Penalty Of Rs.74,000/- Which Was Imposed Under Section 234E Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. With The Assistance Of The Learned Representatives, We Have Gone Through The Record Carefully. It Emerges Out From The Record That The Assessee Failed To Submit Its Tds Return Well In Time During The Accounting Period Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16. Therefore, A Penalty Under Section 234E Of The Act Amounting To Rs.74,000/- Was Imposed Upon The Assessee. Anukool Furniture Pvt Ltd Vs. Acit Ay : 2015-16 2

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

capital value of the asset and not any profit or gain. This decision therefore would not apply in the present case." 4.6 Appellant has further contended that Section 200A

MAYANK RASIKLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC , BENGLURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 151/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 151/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2017-2018 Mayank Rasiklal Patel, The D.C.I.T., 3 Jagjivan Park Socieity, Vs. Cpc, Auda Garden, Bengaluru. Near Ishwer Bhuvan, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-382445. Pan: Afxpp7715H

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 115VSection 143Section 143(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 154Section 200ASection 206CSection 246A

capital gain, other sources and profit share from the said firm. The assessee in the year under consideration declared income of Rs. 39,85,850/- only. While processing the return of income under section 143(1), the CPC Bengaluru made an addition of Rs. 15,85,364/- on account of difference in interest income as per form 26AS

SUN DIVINE CO. OP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-4(2)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 619/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 56

200A; (d)amend any intimation under sub-section (!) of sec lion 206CB.J Section 154 (IA) (1A) Where any matter has been considered and decided in any proceeding by way of appeal or revision relating to an order referred to in sub- section (1), the authority passing such order may, notwithstanding anything contained in any law for !he,, nine being