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.

9 results for “capital gains”+ Section 2(47)(vi)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,210 Delhi1,185 Bangalore553 Ahmedabad311 Chennai261 Jaipur243 Kolkata221 Hyderabad147 Karnataka140 Chandigarh139 Indore110 Raipur79 Cochin78 Pune70 Nagpur59 Calcutta54 Guwahati37 Cuttack32 Surat31 Lucknow27 Rajkot21 SC19 Telangana18 Visakhapatnam16 Agra12 Amritsar9 Ranchi7 Dehradun6 Kerala5 Jodhpur4 Rajasthan4 Patna3 Allahabad2 Panaji2 Varanasi2 Andhra Pradesh1 Punjab & Haryana1 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 Jabalpur1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 43B6 Addition to Income6 Deduction6 Section 143(3)5 Section 56(2)(vii)5 Capital Gains5 Section 484 Section 2(47)3 Section 250o2

SH. RAGHUNATH SAHAI PURI(DECD),PATHANKOT vs. THE DEPTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATHANKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 633/ASR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudhry & Sh. O. P. Meenai.T.A. No. 633/Asr/2014 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Alok Kumar CIT-DR

Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 45Section 48

gains arose from the fact that it was a case of transfer of capital asset generally and also in view of sections 2(47)(ii), 2(47)(v) and 2(47)(vi

Section 143(1)2

SHRI AJAIB SINGH,BATHINDA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, BATHINDA

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

ITA 78/ASR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar01 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 78/Asr/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora & P. K. Singla (Advs.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 2(47)(vi)Section 53A

2(47)(vi) of the Act. There is accordingly no reason to contend that the capital gain had not arisen, which income is subject to tax on the basis of the accrual, i.e., irrespective of the non-receipt of the consideration. This is as once the income has accrued, which is only on the basis of transfer of the relevant

MR RUDER MANI WALIA,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (3), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 257/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.257/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 194DSection 2(14)Section 2(47)Section 250oSection 48

gains is that of the LIC maturity proceeds only. 6.2) Tax treatment of “any sum received under a Life Insurance Policy”: It is important to note that section 10(10D) and section 194DA deals with “any sum received under a Life Insurance Policy” and “Payment in respect of Life Insurance Policy” respectively. Incomes not included in total income

SHRI BHUPINDER SINGH ( PROP) THE NEST HOTELS & MOTELS,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 250/ASR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250oSection 56(2)(vii)

Gains in respect of same property and where the explanation of the assessee was duly accepted and proceedings filed and thus there could not be I.T.A. No.250/Asr/2023 3 Assessment Year: 2011-12 two yard sticks for the same reasons adjudicated by the Deptt. and which facts the Ld. CIT(A) faceless has chosen not to discuss even. 6 Without prejudice

SH. SURAJ PRAKASH,AMRTITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5(5),, AMRITSAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 638/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 638/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. K. R. Jain (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(vi)

vi) r/w s. 45 of the Act in the hands of the assessee. The assessee received a 2 Suraj Parkash v. ITO compensation of Rs.19,57,791/- on the acquisition of his land by the Central Government, i.e., after deducting tax at source thereon at the rate of 10%. The corresponding long-term capital gain (LTCG), returned at Rs.6

SHRI. JAVEED AHMAD LONE ,ANANTNAGH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR

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

ITA 259/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Upender Bhat, C.A

Section 133HSection 147Section 148Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

47,084/- (which consisted of income from capital gains amounting to Rs.21,27,452 plus 3,19,632/- on account of salary income). The appeal was filed before the first appellate authority and it is seen from the appellate order that the ld. CIT(A) has issued a deficiency letter on 05.01.2024 and again on 12.01.2024 calling for an explanation

SATIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUKTSAR, PUNJAB vs. DCIT, ACIT CIRCLE 1, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 527/ASR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 527/Asr/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: S/Shri Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Shri K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 80

vi. CIT Vs. Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicalsreported in[2017] 395 ITR 247HIGH COURT OFGUJARAT vii. Tamilnadu Petro Products Ltd. vs. ACIT [2011] 13 taxmann.com 139 (Madras)[2011]202 Taxman 31 (Madras) 527-Asr-2024 Satia Industries, Muktsar 27 viii) PR. COMMISSIONER OF lNCOME TAX -6 VERSUS NALWA STEEL & POWE reported in 2024 (3) TMI 952 10. After going through

SH. VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL, PROP.,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 38/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 38/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 77/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, DR

47,782. However, after the case was taken in scrutiny, it was assessed at Rs.20,99,900/- by making addition of Rs.32,40,830/- disallowing accrued interest due to bank under section 43B besides some other disallowances. Before the AO as also before the CIT(A), it was explained that the assessee had availed credit facilities from State Bank

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFICER,WARD II(4), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 119/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 38/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 77/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, DR

47,782. However, after the case was taken in scrutiny, it was assessed at Rs.20,99,900/- by making addition of Rs.32,40,830/- disallowing accrued interest due to bank under section 43B besides some other disallowances. Before the AO as also before the CIT(A), it was explained that the assessee had availed credit facilities from State Bank