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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 292Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore63Delhi29Jaipur25Mumbai18Chennai13Nagpur11Rajkot10Patna5Pune5Kolkata5Ahmedabad4Indore4Lucknow3Visakhapatnam3Dehradun2Hyderabad2Cochin1Chandigarh1Raipur1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 14812Section 292B3Section 1443Long Term Capital Gains3Addition to Income3Section 2502Section 143(3)2Section 1472Section 143(2)2Reopening of Assessment

KUSHAL VINODKUMAR BHATT LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI VINODKUMAR RAMANLAL BHATT,ANAND vs. THE ACIT (OSD), WARD-5, ANAND

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 752/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159(2)(b)

capital gain on sale of properties, which has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s.148 on 28-03-2018. The Ld AO in the reassessment order records that was his office in possession of then details of sale of immovable properties made on 26-08-2010. If the AO was in possession of the details of immovable properties transaction, then

PRABODH MOHANLAL SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTL. TAXATION, VADODARA

2

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

ITA 331/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 288Section 292BSection 54

section 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to the Asst. Year 2018-19. I.T.A No. 331/Ahd/2022 A.Y. 2018-19 Page No 2 Prabodh Mohanlal Shah vs. ACIT 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a Non Resident Indian residing in United States of America has shown Long Term Capital Gain of Rs.56

YOGESH HARGOVINDBHAI JOSHI L/H OF BHAVNABEN Y. JOSHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 520/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar, Vice- & Ms.Suchitra R. Kambleassessment Year : 2012-13 Yogesh Hargovindbhai Joshi Vs. The Ito, Ward-6(1)(1) L/H. Of Bhavnaben Y. Joshi Ahmedabad. 8, Manav Pursusharth Society Opp: Hirabhai Tower Uttamnagar, Maninagar Pan : Adupj 2208 C (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Parin Shah, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Abhijit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 129Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

capital gain. 5. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee-legal heir filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Before us, the ld.AR submitted that the assessment order is passed in the name of a dead-person, and therefore, the assessment itself becomes invalid. The ld.AR further submitted that vide

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD.4(2)(1),, AHEMDABAD vs. LATE KHODAJI RANCHHODJI THAKOR LEGAL HEIR NARENDAKUMAR KHODAJI THAKOR, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed

ITA 941/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 941/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-2017

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 292B

Capital gain on sale of Immovable property on the ground that the assessee had expired before issue of Notice u/s. 148 of the Act, despite the fact that: (i) The legal heir of the assessee had not informed the department about death of assessee at any stage prior to completion of assessment. (ii) A reopening notice