Search: disallowance | 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.

651 results for “disallowance”+ Short Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,850 Delhi1,788 Chennai705 Bangalore651 Kolkata543 Ahmedabad469 Jaipur272 Hyderabad201 Pune195 Raipur115 Indore107 Surat88 Chandigarh75 Nagpur56 Lucknow54 Rajkot50 Panaji45 Cochin41 Visakhapatnam40 SC34 Guwahati26 Karnataka24 Amritsar23 Calcutta20 Cuttack18 Kerala15 Dehradun14 Jabalpur14 Agra12 Jodhpur11 Ranchi10 Allahabad4 Punjab & Haryana4 Patna4 Rajasthan3 Orissa2 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 Himachal Pradesh1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income67 Section 143(3)60 Disallowance55 Section 13249 Section 153A49 Section 14834 Deduction31 Section 1127 Section 133A25 Section 2

DIVYA DINESH ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2195/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2026AY 2021-22

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80G

short-term capital loss (STCL) against long-term capital gains (LTCG) for AY 2019-20. The CPC disallowed this set-off, affecting

DIVYA DINESH ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2194/BANG/2025[2019-2020]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 651 · Page 1 of 33

...

25

Section 2(15)24

ITAT Bangalore

24 Feb 2026

AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B.R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80G

short term capital loss as well as brought forward long-term capital loss against the capital gains in accordance with law. After such set off, tax was computed and deductions under Chapter VI-A were claimed correctly. 6.3 However, while processing the return, the CPC disallowed

K A SUJIT CHANDAN,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE BENGALURU.-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

In the result all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 964/BANG/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Siddesh N Gaddi, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Balusamy N, D.R

Section 127Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250

short “The Act”). Since the issues in all these four appeals isarising out of the common Joint development agreement, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order. 3. First, we take up the ITA No.963/Bang/2025 for the AY 2021-22, wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: ITA Nos.962 & 963/Bang/2025 K.S. Akhilesh

SHRI K.G SUBBARAMA SETTY ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT 5(2)(1) BANGALORE, C R BUILDING

In the result all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 965/BANG/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Siddesh N Gaddi, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Balusamy N, D.R

Section 127Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250

short “The Act”). Since the issues in all these four appeals isarising out of the common Joint development agreement, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order. 3. First, we take up the ITA No.963/Bang/2025 for the AY 2021-22, wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: ITA Nos.962 & 963/Bang/2025 K.S. Akhilesh

TYCO FIRE AND SECURITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 270/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.270/Bang/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Acit, M/S. Tyco Fire & Security India Private Limited, Vs. D-601, Rmz Centennial, Circle - 7(1)(1), Kundalahalli Main Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan : Aabct 0087 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Rajan Vora, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 27/11.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.11.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Rajan Vora, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

capital loss on sale of shares as claimed by the Assessee and hold that the transaction of sale of shares deserves to be ignored and no loss can be determined nor can any short term gain be taxed. Thus the grounds relating to short term loss/gain on sale of shares are treated as partly allowed. 54. Ground No.23

O3 CAPITAL GLOBAL ADVISORY PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 931/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

disallowed the Short Term Capital Lass of Rs.4,43,24,751/- (Rs.4,34,75,954/- on sale of shares of his. Morpheus Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd. and Rs.8,48,797/- on other capital assets) by alleging that the impugned transaction appears to be a colorable device. 5.12 It is submitted that the authorities below failed to appreciate that the amounts

M/S. MEDI ASSIST INSURANCE TPA PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-12(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1933/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Medi Assist Insurance Tpa Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of Tower ‘D’, 4Th Floor, Ibc Income-Tax, Knowledge Park, 4/1 Bannerghatta Vs. Circle - 4(1)(2), Main Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 029. Pan –Aaccm 8044 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Prabhu, C.A Revenue By : Shri Sumeer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.02.2022 O R D E R Per Beena Pillaithis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)- 4, Bangalore Dated 22/3/2018 For The Asst. Year 2011-12 For Computing The Short Term Capital Gain At Rs.7,80,38,353/-. 2. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Before Us “(I) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Dcit & Cit(A) Erred In Computing The Short Term Capital Gain At Rs.7,80,38,353/- By Adding The Negative Net-Worth Instead Of Restricting The Same To Nil As Deeded Cost, Since Cost Cannot Be A Negative Value Page 2 Of 19

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Prabhu, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sumeer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 50B

disallowed by insurance company – Rs. 4,68,655/- 2) Short term capital gain on slump sale – Rs.7,80,38,453/- 3) Software

M/S HIRSCH BRACELET INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 3392/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri R.S.V.S. Pavan Kumar, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 32(2)Section 50

Disallowance of expenses of Rs.1,08,54,687; (ii) Non-consideration of claim of assessee that capital gain on sale of land and building has to be bifurcated into two i.e, (a) capital gain on sale of land which has to be regarded as long term capital gain; and (b) capital gain on sale of a building

SHRI BHATKAL RAMARAO PRAKASH ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(2)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2692/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jan 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri H.R. Suresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Suryawamshi, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 2Section 54F

short-term capital gain or a long-term capital gain.” Page 8 of 17 14. In the light of the aforesaid decisions, we are of the view that the capital gain in question in the present case has to be treated as LTCG as claimed by the Assessee. Ground Nos.3 to 5 are accordingly allowed. 15. The next dispute

SHRI BINDIGANAVALE RAVI ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2959/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Smt. R. Prathiba, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 2(47)(v)Section 234DSection 53A

Short-term capital gains and long term capital gains. Depending upon the nature of capital gains the liability of the tax is determined. The mode and manner of computing the capital gains is provided under Section 48 of the Act. The income chargeable under the head capital gain shall be computed by deducting from the full value of the consideration

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S EPSILON ADVISORS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1600/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

term capital gains arising on sale of shares of M/ s. BPL Communication Pvt. Ltd owned by the assessee. This incorrect, bogus and manufactured capital losses cannot be allowed as a deduction and needs to be disallowed. On account of this, the entire short

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S EPSILON ADVISORS PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1569/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

term capital gains arising on sale of shares of M/ s. BPL Communication Pvt. Ltd owned by the assessee. This incorrect, bogus and manufactured capital losses cannot be allowed as a deduction and needs to be disallowed. On account of this, the entire short

EPSILON ADVISORS P. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1607/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

term capital gains arising on sale of shares of M/ s. BPL Communication Pvt. Ltd owned by the assessee. This incorrect, bogus and manufactured capital losses cannot be allowed as a deduction and needs to be disallowed. On account of this, the entire short

EPSILON ADVISORS P. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed and penalty appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1608/BANG/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271

term capital gains arising on sale of shares of M/ s. BPL Communication Pvt. Ltd owned by the assessee. This incorrect, bogus and manufactured capital losses cannot be allowed as a deduction and needs to be disallowed. On account of this, the entire short

SRI. H.R. DIWAKA REDDY,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 771/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Smt.Beena Pillai, Judical Member

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 234Section 54ESection 54F

short term capital gain under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 3. The learned CIT[A] further failed to appreciate that the total consideration received by the appellant for the sale of his interest in land at Haralur Village was Rs.57,48,891 /- and the amount mentioned in the sale deed to the extent

RAMANAMURTHY MATHOD SRINIVASMURTHY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 281/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 263

gain and he stated in his letter that he proposed to complete the short term capital gain/loss as against long term capital gains/loss computed by the assessee. On furnishing necessary details of assessee, he was convinced and came to conclusion that the impugned transfer of property resulted in long term capital loss and same was allowed

M/S. OLIVIA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1251/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 132Section 153C

disallowance of the balance amount of Rs.10,00,000 claimed to have been spent towards cost of construction of compound wall for the reason that the assessee could not furnish any vouchers. Since the CIT(Appeals) has after examination of the details allowed the claim to the extent to which the assessee has substantiated the spend, we see no reason

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S OLIVIYA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1212/BANG/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 132Section 153C

disallowance of the balance amount of Rs.10,00,000 claimed to have been spent towards cost of construction of compound wall for the reason that the assessee could not furnish any vouchers. Since the CIT(Appeals) has after examination of the details allowed the claim to the extent to which the assessee has substantiated the spend, we see no reason

M/S OLIVIA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1253/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 132Section 153C

disallowance of the balance amount of Rs.10,00,000 claimed to have been spent towards cost of construction of compound wall for the reason that the assessee could not furnish any vouchers. Since the CIT(Appeals) has after examination of the details allowed the claim to the extent to which the assessee has substantiated the spend, we see no reason

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S OLIVIYA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1211/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 132Section 153C

disallowance of the balance amount of Rs.10,00,000 claimed to have been spent towards cost of construction of compound wall for the reason that the assessee could not furnish any vouchers. Since the CIT(Appeals) has after examination of the details allowed the claim to the extent to which the assessee has substantiated the spend, we see no reason