Search: capital gains | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

8 results for “capital gains”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,028 Delhi1,718 Ahmedabad652 Jaipur489 Chennai483 Bangalore423 Kolkata379 Hyderabad306 Pune278 Surat228 Indore189 Chandigarh165 Karnataka129 Visakhapatnam94 Agra91 Raipur90 Nagpur68 Rajkot68 Cochin63 Lucknow63 Cuttack48 Amritsar40 Calcutta39 Ranchi29 Patna24 Dehradun22 SC19 Jodhpur17 Guwahati17 Telangana14 Allahabad8 Panaji7 Varanasi6 Jabalpur5 Punjab & Haryana3 Gauhati1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 Orissa1 Rajasthan1 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 119 Section 2(15)9 Section 1488 Addition to Income8 Section 143(3)6 Section 50C5 Section 1475 Section 143(1)4 Section 36(1)(va)4

M/S GANGA NURSING HOME,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT,, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 186/ALLD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 50C

capital gain. Penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is issued on this point.” 4. The assessee

AJAY KUMAR GUPTA,FATEHPUR vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI (AO:ITO-2(4),FATEHPUR, FATEHPUR

In the result, appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 19/ALLD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad20 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh ,Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50C

CAPITAL GAINS- (i) Sales Consideration - Rs. 5,00,000.00 (ii) Stamp Duty Valuation - Rs. 15,78,000.00 (iii) Cost of Acquisition- .5260x2,80,000/1.3350-Rs.1,10,332.00 (iv) Indexed Cost of Acquisition( 2001-02) =1,10332x426/389- Rs.1,20,815.00 (v) As per New calculation of Indexed Cost- 1,20.815x264/100= Rs. 3,18,953.00 (vi) LONG TERM CAPITALGAINS

SMT. RANJANA BAJPAI,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), ALLAHABAD

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 22/ALLD/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad05 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

capital gains to account for purchase price, as against the action of the ld. AO who is seen to have added the entire sale consideration. Regarding the alleged donation of Rs.2,00,000/-, the ld. CIT(A) was not convinced of the bona fides of the claim and hence upheld the action of the ld. AO. Lastly, regarding the cash

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 89/ALLD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

Gains from AYs. 2014-15 to 2016-17 business and profession’. The net profit disclosed by the assessee of Rs. 6,54,93,137/- was added to the total income of the assessee and penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were initiated. 7.6 Moving on the AO further observed that certain funds and grants shown under the head under

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 88/ALLD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

Gains from AYs. 2014-15 to 2016-17 business and profession’. The net profit disclosed by the assessee of Rs. 6,54,93,137/- was added to the total income of the assessee and penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were initiated. 7.6 Moving on the AO further observed that certain funds and grants shown under the head under

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 87/ALLD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

Gains from AYs. 2014-15 to 2016-17 business and profession’. The net profit disclosed by the assessee of Rs. 6,54,93,137/- was added to the total income of the assessee and penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) were initiated. 7.6 Moving on the AO further observed that certain funds and grants shown under the head under

DCIT, CIRCLE-II , ALLAHABAD vs. BHARAT PUMPS & COMPRESSORS LTD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 148/ALLD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

capital in nature. These are also not illegal payments. Accordingly, additions so made (Rs. 96,26,000+Rs. 29,02,000) are hereby deleted.” 5. Now it was the turn of Revenue to be aggrieved by the decision of ld. CIT(A) allowing assessee’s appeal on this issue and the Revenue has filed this appeal with tribunal. The appeal

DCIT, CIRCLE-II , ALLAHABAD vs. BHARAT PUMPS & COMPRESSORS LTD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 147/ALLD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT (DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

capital in nature. These are also not illegal payments. Accordingly, additions so made (Rs. 96,26,000+Rs. 29,02,000) are hereby deleted.” 5. Now it was the turn of Revenue to be aggrieved by the decision of ld. CIT(A) allowing assessee’s appeal on this issue and the Revenue has filed this appeal with tribunal. The appeal