BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI 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.

7 results for “capital gains”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai352Delhi275Bangalore138Chennai120Kolkata98Agra69Ahmedabad67Jaipur54Chandigarh53Pune42Hyderabad32Visakhapatnam30Indore28Surat27Lucknow23Nagpur18Cochin13Rajkot7Amritsar7Allahabad5Jodhpur5Patna5Cuttack4Raipur3Karnataka2Panaji2Varanasi1Himachal Pradesh1Kerala1Jabalpur1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 15417Section 143(1)7Section 2504Section 143(3)4Rectification u/s 1544Addition to Income3Deduction3Section 682Section 69A2Section 69B

MESERS EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD,PATHANKOT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

ITA 561/ASR/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tarsem Lal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

capital gain could not be separately computed. Qua the first issue, the ld. CIT(A) held that the issue being now raised was not the subject matter of appeal and, consequently, not adjudicated u/s. 250 in the first instance. As regards the second ground, the same raised a contentious issue, i.e., which was debatable and, thus, outside the purview

2
Section 69C2
Business Income2

M/S EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD. ,PATHANKOT vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-6,, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

ITA 284/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tarsem Lal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

capital gain could not be separately computed. Qua the first issue, the ld. CIT(A) held that the issue being now raised was not the subject matter of appeal and, consequently, not adjudicated u/s. 250 in the first instance. As regards the second ground, the same raised a contentious issue, i.e., which was debatable and, thus, outside the purview

M/S ACTIVE TOOLS (P). LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, JALANDHAR

ITA 260/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 115Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 154Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69CSection 69D

capital gains, nor as it income from "other sources" because the provisions of sections 69,69A, 69B and 69 treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion etc. and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and sources of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily explained. Therefore, in these cases, the source

HARDIK BHARTI,JALANDHAR vs. ITO WARD 4(3) , JALANDHAR

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

ITA 538/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

capital gains amounting to Rs.4,23,900/- which has been processed by CPC, Bengaluru at Rs. 8,47,800/- u/s 143(1), which is exactly double the amount of the income returned. A rectification application u/s 154

THE STRAW BOARD MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED ,BAJWARA, HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1,HOSHIARPUR, HOSHIARPUR

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 318/ASR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 318/Asr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) The Straw Board Manufacturing Ito Company Ltd Ward 1 बनाम/ Vs. C/O Lala Shri Chunilal Free Hospital Hoshiarpur. Bajwara, Hoshiarpur – 146 023 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaact-5095-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Sandeep Vijh (Ca) –Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Charan Dass (Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04-08-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata [Cit(A)] Dated 26-03-2024 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S. 143(1) Of The Act On 22-11-2022 Proposing Certain Adjustment Of Rs.6.58 Lacs To The Returned Income Of The Assessee. The Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed Adjustment Of Rs.5.94 Lacs Against Which The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. Having

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Vijh (CA) –Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 43B

rectification u/s 154, the assessee preferred first appeal against the same. It was pointed out that the figure of Rs.10,35,757/- comprised-off profit on sale of car for Rs.1,55,250/- and profit on sale of investment for Rs.8,83,237/-. The investments were considered under the head capital gains

SH. JASPAL SINGH S/O SH. SWARAN SINGH,AMRITSAR. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 445/ASR/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 May 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 445/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Sh. Padam Bahl (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 144Section 154

154 order, i.e., were the assessee to be unsuccessful in obtaining the rectification sought. The charge of mala fides by the Revenue is based on suspicion, perhaps considering that the assessee admits to have adopted, on own violation, a particular course of action. The second reason is that the said course – whatever be its’ merits, is, without doubt, only

ATC LOGISTICAL SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, AMRITSAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 241/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 115JSection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 40ASection 40A(7)

154 r.w.s. 143(1) is I.T.A. No. 241/Asr/2023 3 Assessment Year: 2017-18 enclosed herewith wherefrom it is clear that the relief of Rs.9,12,665/- was allowed and it is requested that the necessary relief of Rs.9,12,665/- may kindly be allowed. 6. That the AO was not justified in charging tax on the so-called deemed total