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.

14 results for “capital gains”+ Section 271Fclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur14Ahmedabad14Mumbai12Amritsar10Bangalore9Surat8Delhi6Lucknow6Pune5Cuttack4Indore3Hyderabad2Chandigarh2Visakhapatnam1Jodhpur1Patna1Raipur1Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 271F24Section 69A12Section 1479Addition to Income9Section 1488Penalty8Section 1447Section 143(3)5Section 234A4Section 139

AVANI DIPAKBHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE INTL. TXN., VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 706/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhyaru, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 271F

271F was inserted in Section 273B by Finance Act, 1997, w.e.f., 01.04.1997, which is much prior to the assessment years in question. 11. Therefore, it has to be seen as to what would be reasonable cause for being entitled to the protection under Section 273B. The meaning of the expression "reasonable cause" could be culled out from certain decisions, which

AVANI DIPAKBHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE INTL. TXN., VADODARA

4
Cash Deposit4
Natural Justice3

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 705/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhyaru, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 271F

271F was inserted in Section 273B by Finance Act, 1997, w.e.f., 01.04.1997, which is much prior to the assessment years in question. 11. Therefore, it has to be seen as to what would be reasonable cause for being entitled to the protection under Section 273B. The meaning of the expression "reasonable cause" could be culled out from certain decisions, which

AVANI DIPAKBHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE INTL. TXN., VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 707/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhyaru, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 271F

271F was inserted in Section 273B by Finance Act, 1997, w.e.f., 01.04.1997, which is much prior to the assessment years in question. 11. Therefore, it has to be seen as to what would be reasonable cause for being entitled to the protection under Section 273B. The meaning of the expression "reasonable cause" could be culled out from certain decisions, which

HARSHADKUMAR HARGOVANDAS PATEL,KALOL vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 125/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 55A

capital gain was computed at ₹9,51,234/-, and\nsince the assessee had declared only 6,45,834/-, the difference of\n3,05,400/- was added to the total income of the assessee. Penalty\nproceedings under sections 271(1)(c) and 271F

SH. RAJESH NARENDRABHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(2), VADODARA, VADODARA

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

ITA 1592/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2012-13 Shri Rajesh Narendrabhai Patel Ito, Ward-1(2)(2) Baroda Bolt & Engineering Works Vadodara. Opp: Lalbaug Atitigruh Pratapnagar Vadodara Pan : Acqpp 6089 C (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : None : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: None
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C(2)Section 54Section 80C

Capital Gain 62,60,142/- Income from Other Sources 91,168/- Gross Total Income 79,05,310/- Less: Deduction u/s 80C 30,000/- Total Income Assessed 78,75,310/- 2.8 Penalty proceedings under sections 271F

MOHAN RAMCHANDANI,BANGLORE vs. ACIT-INTL TAX-2 AHEMDABAD, AHMEDABAD GUJARAT

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

ITA 1944/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2016-17 Mohan Ramchandani Acit-Intl Tax-2 Flat-11001 Boddaballapur Road Vs. Ahmedabad. Presting Monte Carlo Yelahanka Satelite Town So Bangalore North. Pan : Adgpr 0211 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Saurabh Gupta, Ar Assessee By : Shri Saresh Kartik Laxmanbhai, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Saresh Kartik Laxmanbhai, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 54ESection 54FSection 54F(4)

Capital Gains Account Scheme as required under section 54F(4) of the Act. Relying upon various judicial precedents the AO concluded that the agreement was self-serving and not capable of evidencing a genuine investment in residential property. Accordingly, the exemption of Rs.2,33,05,406/- claimed under section 54F was disallowed, and the total income was 4 assessed

KARAMSHIBHAI MEGHJIBHAI PATEL,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(4) (PREVIOUSLY THE ITO, WARD-3, NAVSARI), PETLAD

ITA 258/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 234ASection 249(4)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 45

Section 2(14)(iii) of the Act, thus not a capital asset liable to capital gain tax u/s. 45 of the Act. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in upholding the assessment order passed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act despite the fact that the assessment proceedings have not been

ARVIND SHASHANK HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 460/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2025AY 2013-14
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 210Section 234ASection 271(1)Section 271F

capital gain from Aricent Infra shares.\n7. Considering these facts on record, it cannot be established that the Assessing\nOfficer has really gone through the return of income filed by the assessee to come to\nthe conclusion that there has been an escapement of income other than the\ninformation provided by the Department. The reasons recorded are found

SANJAYSINH PRAVINSINH CHUDASAMA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(5), BHAVNAGAR

ITA 86/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271F

capital gain amounting to Rs.26,02,000/-, holding it to be the adventure in the nature of trade. 4. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts in changing the head of income without affording any opportunity to the Appellant. Under the facts of the case, the transaction in question was a sole transaction and thus

MINAL PRASHANT VAKIL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE. PRASHANT RASIKLAL VAKIL,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 1, INTERNATIONAL TAX AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1546/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 194ASection 234ASection 250Section 271(1)Section 69

capital gains and income from other sources. As per the information with the Department, assessee made TDS payment for a consideration of Rs.1,41,95,033/- on purchase of immovable property u/s. 194A but no Return of Income filed. Therefore the assessment was reopened and a show cause notice u/s. 148A(b) was issued to the assessee. As there

HEMA VIRAL JOSHI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, GANDHINAGAR

Accordingly, these four appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 611/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.609, 610 & 611/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively Hema Viral Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Admpj 6455 B & आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.612/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Viral Vinodchandra Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abjpj 6812 H अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 69A

271F of the Act. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering various facts and in not appreciating the facts and law in their proper perspective. 11. 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

VIRAL VINODCHANDRA JOSHI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, GANDHINAGAR

Accordingly, these four appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 612/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.609, 610 & 611/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively Hema Viral Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Admpj 6455 B & आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.612/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Viral Vinodchandra Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abjpj 6812 H अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 69A

271F of the Act. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering various facts and in not appreciating the facts and law in their proper perspective. 11. 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

HEMA VIRAL JOSHI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, GANDHINAGAR

Accordingly, these four appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 610/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.609, 610 & 611/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively Hema Viral Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Admpj 6455 B & आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.612/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Viral Vinodchandra Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abjpj 6812 H अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 69A

271F of the Act. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering various facts and in not appreciating the facts and law in their proper perspective. 11. 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

HEMA VIRAL JOSHI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, GANDHINAGAR

Accordingly, these four appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 609/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.609, 610 & 611/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively Hema Viral Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Admpj 6455 B & आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.612/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Viral Vinodchandra Joshi The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 9C Sector-19, Ward-2, Gandhinagar V/S. Gandhinagar – 382 019 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abjpj 6812 H अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 69A

271F of the Act. 10. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering various facts and in not appreciating the facts and law in their proper perspective. 11. 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