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”+ Section 33clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,219 Delhi2,522 Bangalore1,159 Chennai806 Ahmedabad726 Kolkata603 Jaipur541 Hyderabad380 Pune310 Chandigarh288 Surat267 Karnataka249 Indore223 Cochin158 Raipur134 Visakhapatnam127 Nagpur89 Agra85 Rajkot73 Cuttack69 Amritsar66 Calcutta58 Lucknow53 Guwahati52 SC52 Panaji39 Telangana37 Dehradun22 Jodhpur21 Jabalpur15 Patna13 Ranchi13 Kerala9 Varanasi8 Allahabad8 Orissa5 Rajasthan5 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 Andhra Pradesh2 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 Punjab & Haryana1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 253(3)15 Section 143(3)11 Section 119 Section 2(15)9 Addition to Income5 Section 1543 Section 50C3 Section 123 Section 260A3

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

section 2(14)(iii) of the Act and is not a capital asset and hence capital gains as worked out by assessing officer at Rs. 33

Condonation of Delay3

Rectification u/s 1543

MEJA URJA NIGAM (P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD-2 (2), ALLAHABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for ay: 2015-16 and 2016-17

ITA 54/ALLD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad03 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms.Namita S. Pandey, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Parv Agrawal, CA

Section 143(3)

gains'. Similarly, if a company purchases a rented house and gets rent, which rent will be assessable to tax under section 22 of the Act as income from house property. Likewise, a company may have income from other sources. It may buy shares and get dividends. Such dividends will be taxable under section 56. The company may also

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 21/ALLD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

Capital gains" and claims that the loss or any part thereof should be carried forward under sub-section (1) of section 72, or sub-section (2) of section 73, or sub-section (1) [or sub-section (3)] of section 74, [or sub-section (3) of section 74A], he may furnish, within the time allowed under sub-section (1) [***], a return

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3) , ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 19/ALLD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

Capital gains" and claims that the loss or any part thereof should be carried forward under sub-section (1) of section 72, or sub-section (2) of section 73, or sub-section (1) [or sub-section (3)] of section 74, [or sub-section (3) of section 74A], he may furnish, within the time allowed under sub-section (1) [***], a return

TRIVENI GLASS LIMITED,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 20/ALLD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao& Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 253(3)

Capital gains" and claims that the loss or any part thereof should be carried forward under sub-section (1) of section 72, or sub-section (2) of section 73, or sub-section (1) [or sub-section (3)] of section 74, [or sub-section (3) of section 74A], he may furnish, within the time allowed under sub-section (1) [***], a return

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

section 20(2) of the 1973 Act, mandate that the funds of the authority are to be applied towards meeting the expenses of the authority in the administration of that Act and for no other purpose. iv. The contention of the Revenue that the assessee was a commercial enterprise which had undertaken various civil construction work on behalf of State

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

section 20(2) of the 1973 Act, mandate that the funds of the authority are to be applied towards meeting the expenses of the authority in the administration of that Act and for no other purpose. iv. The contention of the Revenue that the assessee was a commercial enterprise which had undertaken various civil construction work on behalf of State

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

section 20(2) of the 1973 Act, mandate that the funds of the authority are to be applied towards meeting the expenses of the authority in the administration of that Act and for no other purpose. iv. The contention of the Revenue that the assessee was a commercial enterprise which had undertaken various civil construction work on behalf of State