Search: capital gains | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court 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.

45 results for “capital gains”+ Section 143(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,207 Delhi3,694 Bangalore1,376 Chennai1,184 Kolkata1,169 Ahmedabad783 Jaipur637 Hyderabad541 Pune431 Indore289 Chandigarh271 Surat174 Cochin163 Nagpur147 Raipur138 Rajkot129 Visakhapatnam128 Lucknow108 Amritsar78 Panaji65 Dehradun64 Patna53 Karnataka52 Guwahati48 Calcutta45 Agra43 Jodhpur41 SC38 Ranchi29 Jabalpur28 Cuttack22 Allahabad20 Kerala12 Varanasi9 Rajasthan6 Orissa5 Punjab & Haryana5 Telangana4 Andhra Pradesh2 Himachal Pradesh2 Gauhati1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)30 Section 260A24 Addition to Income21 Section 6820 Section 10(38)15 Section 14714 Long Term Capital Gains13 Penny Stock12 Section 26310 Capital Gains

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9,KOLKATA vs. MANJU OSATWAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and

ITAT/96/2021HC Calcutta11 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

For Appellant: Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Swapna Das, Adv

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 180Section 182Section 260ASection 263

Showing 1–20 of 45 · Page 1 of 3

8

Condonation of Delay8

Section 143(2)7

capital gain and claimed exemption under Section 10(38) of the Act. The assessing officer further noted that the assessee had made sale/purchase of shares through a stock broker. A communication under section 133(6) of the Act was issued to the said share broker for verification and confirmation of the transactions regarding sale and purchase of shares and reply

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ITC LIMITED

Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated

ITA/125/2018HC Calcutta27 Jun 2024

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI,HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

capital gain. The Assessing Officer treated it as revenue receipt and according levied tax by assessment order dated 31.12.2009 under Section 143(3

M/S. GAYAN TRADERS LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II

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

ITA/48/2009HC Calcutta30 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 143(3)Section 260A

Section 143(3) of the Act by order dated December 31, 2007 accepted the long term capital gains which arose

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -5,KOL vs. RAMAKANT BERIWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/60/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5,KOL vs. SUNITA GOYAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/78/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -5,KOLKATA vs. SWATI BAJAJ

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/6/2022HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. AAYUSH JHUNJHUNWALA HUF

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/89/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SILIGURI vs. NEETU AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/3/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9, KOLKATA vs. M/S. GOPAL PRASAD TIKMANI HUF

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/153/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. NAND KISHORE AGARWALA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/22/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KOL 5 vs. RANJIKA GUPTA

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/80/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SILIGURI vs. NITIN KUMAR AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/36/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 KOLKATA vs. M/S GIRISH TIKMANI HUF

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/157/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 13 KOLKATA vs. SMT GANAPATI DEVI AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/34/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9, KOLKATA vs. GOPAL PRASAD TIKMANI

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/151/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PR CIT 9 KOLKATA vs. GIRISH TIKMANI

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/156/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

3. The assessee in the lead case, Mrs. Swati Bajaj filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-2015 declaring a total income of Rs. 6,57,300/-.The return was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act and under Section 142 (1) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. RUSSEL CREDIT LIMITED

ITAT/153/2025HC Calcutta20 Feb 2026

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ,HON'BLE JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

Section 143(3) on March 8, 2021, at an assessed income of Rs.39,76,74,478/-. This included treating the gain of Rs.12,97,56,648/- from the sale of 34 unquoted preference shares of ICICI Bank that was purchased in June 2012 and held for nearly six years before it was sold in March 2018 as long-term capital

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. ARSHIA GLOBAL TRADECOM PRIVATE LIMITED

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITAT/175/2021HC Calcutta13 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260ASection 68

Section 143(3) of the Act. The decision in Peass Industrial Engineers Private Limited was distinguished by stating that it was a case where the assessment was reopened within four years. Ultimately, the tribunal held the reopening of the assessment was bad in law since no allegation of failure on the part of the assessee to fully and truly disclose

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. SHRI SAWANKUMAR T JAJOO

Accordingly, the appeal fails and dismissed

ITAT/271/2024HC Calcutta17 Jan 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 260ASection 68

Capital Gains thereby giving rise to the vice of perversity in the decision making process? iii) Whether the Hon’ble ITAT had erred in law and on facts by deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 68 of the IT Act, 1961 in the order u/s. 143(3) read with section

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5,KOLKATA vs. AMIT KUMAR JAIN

ITAT/113/2022HC Calcutta26 Sept 2022

Bench: :

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 68Section 69C

Capital Gains (LTCG) comes under the purview of unexplained cash – credits under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 involving proceedings under Section 143(3