BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 54B(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi66Chandigarh65Indore56Surat34Ahmedabad32Pune24Jaipur19Chennai17Bangalore12Raipur10Rajkot8Mumbai8Nagpur6Patna5Jodhpur4Kolkata4Amritsar4Cochin4Agra4Hyderabad4Dehradun4Jabalpur2Cuttack2Varanasi1Visakhapatnam1

Key Topics

Section 54B11Section 143(3)5Addition to Income4Section 2503Section 10(37)3Deduction3Section 54F2Disallowance2

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (2), MUKTSAR vs. AJAIB SINGH, VILLAGE BHARU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 354/ASR/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jun 2025

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 354/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250Section 54B

Gain at Rs.3,68,15,000/-. Aggrieved by the said order the Assessee has instituted the current appeal.” I.T.A. No. 354/Asr/2024 6 Assessment Year: 2012-13 5. Thereafter, in para no. 5.1 in appellate order the ld. CIT(A) has observed as follows: “5.1 1 As per Section 54B(1) any capital

SHRI GURKHA SINGH ALIAS JOGINDER SINGH ,BATHINDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFIER WARD 1(1), BATHINDA

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

ITA 145/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.145/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 54BSection 64Section 69A

gain as it is not a capital asset as the same is beyond 8 km from the Municipal Limits of Bathinda. 4. That the learned AO erred in not considering the expenses of Rs. 600000/- in financial year 1987-88 for the improvement of agricultural land in question withdrawn from saving bank account of my father which was produced before

SHRI NIRVAIR SINGH,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(3), AMRITSAR

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

ITA 655/ASR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Nipun Khanna, C. A
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 250o

1. That the order passed by the worthy CIT (Appeals) and the Ld. Assessing Officer is illegal and arbitrary and this ground of appeal pervades other grounds of appeal too. 2. That the worthy CIT (Appeals) has erred on law and facts by not considering the peak credit calculation accepted by the then worthy CIT (Appeals) -2, Amritsar in order

DAVINDER SINGH,SAMAOH PUNJAB vs. ITO WARD 1(4), MANSA, MANSA,PUNJAB

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 214/ASR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 214/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sh. Davinder Singh, Bhal Patti, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(4), Samaon, Matti B.O. Kotra, Mansa. Mansa, Punjab. [Pan:-Abmps3429E] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv & Sh. Appellant By Himanshu Gupta, Ca Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 250Section 54BSection 54F

gain. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the sale consideration declared by the assessee in income tax return was less than the sale consideration reported in Form 26QB (Form 26QB and schedule CG of ITR) and claim of large exempt income (Schedule EI of ITR)”. The assessee has sold a property (land) measuring 13 biswa for consideration