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.

47 results for “capital gains”+ Section 270A(6)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai189Delhi161Chandigarh65Ahmedabad47Jaipur32Chennai31Hyderabad27Pune24Bangalore18Kolkata10Nagpur9Agra8Rajkot6Surat5Lucknow5Raipur4Patna4Amritsar3Indore3Visakhapatnam2Dehradun2Ranchi2Jodhpur1Cochin1Cuttack1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 14A79Section 270A41Section 54F37Disallowance30Section 143(3)28Section 14727Addition to Income26Penalty25Section 6817Section 148

SUMIT H BHAGCHANDANI,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1984/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 270ASection 54FSection 54F(1)Section 54F(4)

270A of the Act is unjustified. 4. Appellant craves leave to add/alter grounds of appeal.” Sumit H Bhagchandani vs. DCIT Asst. Year –2017-18 - 2– 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, Shri Sumit Harishbhai Bhagchandani, filed his return of income for Assessment Year 2017-18 on 30.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs.2

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

17
Deduction17
Capital Gains15

PARULBEN VIJAYKUMAR PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 164/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 270A(10)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

capital gain amounting to Rs. 22,20,156/- by filing return of income and if, the case of the assessee was not reopened under Section 147 of the Act, the assessee would not have reported the escaped amount and then, the said amount would have escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer, therefore, initiated penalty proceedings under Section 270A Parulben Vijakumar Patel

ASHOKBHAI KHODABHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 84/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 270A(2)(b)Section 270A(6)

capital gain arising on sale of property and, therefore, the returned income was accepted vide assessment order under section 147/144B of the Act dated 24.03.2022. Since the assessee did not file his original return of income, penalty proceeding under section 270A of the Act was initiated for under- reporting of income. Thereafter, a separate penalty order under section 270A dated

DCIE CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHEMDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 849/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

capital gains must be considered as part of eligible income and recomputed the deduction under section 80-IE accordingly. Further, the assessee made additional claims during assessment ITA Nos. 847to850/Ahd/2025 & 912to915/Ahd/2025 DCIT vs. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Years–2018-19 & 2020-21 to 2022-23 - 4– proceedings namely exclusion of GST/excise refund from book profit

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCE LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 847/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

capital gains must be considered as part of eligible income and recomputed the deduction under section 80-IE accordingly. Further, the assessee made additional claims during assessment ITA Nos. 847to850/Ahd/2025 & 912to915/Ahd/2025 DCIT vs. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Years–2018-19 & 2020-21 to 2022-23 - 4– proceedings namely exclusion of GST/excise refund from book profit

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION - THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 913/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

capital gains must be considered as part of eligible income and recomputed the deduction under section 80-IE accordingly. Further, the assessee made additional claims during assessment ITA Nos. 847to850/Ahd/2025 & 912to915/Ahd/2025 DCIT vs. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Years–2018-19 & 2020-21 to 2022-23 - 4– proceedings namely exclusion of GST/excise refund from book profit

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 912/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

capital gains must be considered as part of eligible income and recomputed the deduction under section 80-IE accordingly. Further, the assessee made additional claims during assessment ITA Nos. 847to850/Ahd/2025 & 912to915/Ahd/2025 DCIT vs. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Years–2018-19 & 2020-21 to 2022-23 - 4– proceedings namely exclusion of GST/excise refund from book profit

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 915/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

capital gains must be considered as part of eligible income and recomputed the deduction under section 80-IE accordingly. Further, the assessee made additional claims during assessment ITA Nos. 847to850/Ahd/2025 & 912to915/Ahd/2025 DCIT vs. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Years–2018-19 & 2020-21 to 2022-23 - 4– proceedings namely exclusion of GST/excise refund from book profit

DCIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR vs. ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED SHIVARTH AMBIT, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 850/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

capital gains must be considered as part of eligible income and recomputed the deduction under section 80-IE accordingly. Further, the assessee made additional claims during assessment ITA Nos. 847to850/Ahd/2025 & 912to915/Ahd/2025 DCIT vs. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. Eris Lifesciences Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Years–2018-19 & 2020-21 to 2022-23 - 4– proceedings namely exclusion of GST/excise refund from book profit

SHAILESH NATVARLAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 371/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Ravindra, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 54

capital gain of Rs.6,96,236/- to tax. Penalty proceedings under section 270A were also initiated for misreporting of income. 3 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). In the appellate proceedings, the assessee reiterated that the stamp duty of Rs.48,000/- was the value of the stamp paper used for the purchase deed, and sufficient

HASMUKHLAL ISHVARLAL PATEL,PATAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, PATAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 763/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 270A

section 270A of the Income Tax Act. The Ld. AO made an addition based on the difference in Long Term Capital Gain between the original and revised returns without properly considering the legal and factual aspects of the transaction. The revised return was filed within the prescribed time to correct an inadvertent omission, and there was no misreporting of income

HASMUKHLAL ISHVARLAL PATEL,PATAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, PATAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 764/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 270A

section 270A of the Income Tax Act. The Ld. AO made an addition based on the difference in Long Term Capital Gain between the original and revised returns without properly considering the legal and factual aspects of the transaction. The revised return was filed within the prescribed time to correct an inadvertent omission, and there was no misreporting of income

SANDEEP MOHANRAJ SINGHI,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE4(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 769/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 68

capital gain on sale of 80,00,000 shares donated to the assessee trust, was avoided by the trustee by making this arrangement, was not denied. In view of this fact, the Ld. CIT(A) had rightly invoked the provisions of Section 13(1)(c) of the Act to deny the claim of exemption under Section

ACIT (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE 1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. DR K R SHROFF FOUNDATION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed\n\n29

ITA 1205/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 68

capital gain on sale of 80,00,000 shares donated to\nthe assessee trust, was avoided by the trustee by making this\narrangement, was not denied. In view of this fact, the Ld. CIT(A) had\nrightly invoked the provisions of Section 13(1)(c) of the Act to deny the\nclaim of exemption under Section

DR K R SHROFF FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed\n\n29

ITA 769/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 68

capital gain on sale of 80,00,000 shares donated to\nthe assessee trust, was avoided by the trustee by making this\narrangement, was not denied. In view of this fact, the Ld. CIT(A) had\nrightly invoked the provisions of Section 13(1)(c) of the Act to deny the\nclaim of exemption under Section

KRUNAL SANGHVI,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1285/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Chintan Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 253Section 270A(9)Section 5

270A(9) of the Act so as to justify the levy of penalty in terms of the said Section on the assessee. 9. The facts of the case are that the assessee had claimed deduction of capital gains earned u/s.54F of the Act by making investment in a new property and when doing so had claimed ITA No.1285/Ahd/2025 [Krunal Sanghvi

ASHOK AMARNATH AGRAWAL,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1077/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 147Section 250Section 271ASection 68

capital gain which is totally contrary to the facts on record, which goes to prove that the Assessing Officer has not examined the income-tax return which is a primary document to be examined before issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. Hence, the notice issued by the Assessing Officer suffers from latches and devoid of due diligence. Hence

ASHOK AMARNATH AGRAWAL,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1078/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 147Section 250Section 271ASection 68

capital gain which is totally contrary to the facts on record, which goes to prove that the Assessing Officer has not examined the income-tax return which is a primary document to be examined before issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. Hence, the notice issued by the Assessing Officer suffers from latches and devoid of due diligence. Hence

SK HISARIA HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD 5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1928/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaita Nos. 1928 & 1929/Ahd/2025 Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 270ASection 271ASection 68

6. The learned AO has erred in law and on facts in in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A of the Act. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. Total tax effect

S K HISARIA HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD 5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1929/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaita Nos. 1928 & 1929/Ahd/2025 Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 270ASection 271ASection 68

6. The learned AO has erred in law and on facts in in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A of the Act. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. Total tax effect