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.

6 results for “capital gains”+ Section 546clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi196Mumbai157Karnataka101Chennai88Bangalore42Jaipur34Ahmedabad20Visakhapatnam13Kolkata12Rajkot8Indore8Hyderabad7Pune7Chandigarh6Amritsar6Surat5Telangana5Lucknow4Dehradun4Cuttack3Jabalpur2Agra2Raipur2SC2Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 14813Section 54B9Section 12A7Section 1516Addition to Income6Section 5463Deduction3Reopening of Assessment3Section 250(6)2Section 143(3)

SHRI NACHHATER SINGH S/O SHRI GURBAKSH SINGH,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICEER , BATHINDA

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 164/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 148Section 151Section 546Section 54B

546 of the Act as the payments were made through cheques from the bank account of the assessee even though the sale deed was registered at less value but the fact remain that the assessee purchased the agricultural land in higher cost. CONCISE GROUNDS OF APPEAL in 1. That the Ld. PCIT has erred in confirming the action

SHRI.BOOTA SINGH S/O. SH. NACHATER SINGH, BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(1), BATHINDA

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

2
Section 1442
ITA 162/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 148Section 151Section 546Section 54B

546 of the Act as the payments were made through cheques from the bank account of the assessee even though the sale deed was registered at less value but the fact remain that the assessee purchased the agricultural land in higher cost. CONCISE GROUNDS OF APPEAL in 1. That the Ld. PCIT has erred in confirming the action

SHRI BABBU SINGH S/O SHRI NACHHATER SINGH,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICEER WARD-2(1), BATHINDA

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 163/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 148Section 151Section 546Section 54B

546 of the Act as the payments were made through cheques from the bank account of the assessee even though the sale deed was registered at less value but the fact remain that the assessee purchased the agricultural land in higher cost. CONCISE GROUNDS OF APPEAL in 1. That the Ld. PCIT has erred in confirming the action

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, FARIDKOT, BSNL BUILDING vs. M/S VOHRA SOLVEX PVT. LTD, SADIQ ROAD

In the result, C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 588/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69C

546 (Bombay) INCOME TAX: Where Assessing Officer made addition by disallowing expenses on purchases on ground that an information was received from sales tax department that assessee was beneficiary of accommodation entries on account of bogus purchases, since Assessing Officer had not disputed corresponding sales transactions, purchases also could not be bogus and, thus, impugned addition made on account

SHRI MOHD MANZOOR,RAJOURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2 (3), JAMMU

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

ITA 166/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar21 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 144Section 250oSection 28Section 44ASection 69A

capital gain tax, Assessing Officer erred in treating said deposit as unexplained investment of assessee [In favour of assessee] e) 2017] 83 taxmann.com 246 (Mumbai - Trib.) IN THE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH ' J'Jaspal Singh Sehgal v. Income-tax Officer WD 21(2)(1), Mumbai* Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credit (Cash) - Assessment year 2009-10 - Where

M/S SHREE BABA GAJJA JI JAIN SOCIETY (REGD.),JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXAMPTION), JALANDHAR

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

ITA 539/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N.K.Choudhry & Dr. A.L.Saini

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna (Ld. C. A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. D. R.)
Section 10Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

capital receipt as exempt. The Assessing Officer further observed that the aims and objects of the society seems to have been formed for private religious purpose and to benefit “Jain Community” in particular. Further the minutes of the meeting held by the society also showed that the society is in process of purchasing land for “Shree Baba Gajja Ji Jain