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.

731 results for “capital gains”

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai9,378 Delhi6,905 Chennai3,137 Bangalore2,871 Kolkata2,414 Ahmedabad2,003 Pune1,424 Hyderabad1,381 Jaipur1,370 Surat770 Chandigarh731 Indore620 Karnataka516 Cochin483 Visakhapatnam448 Raipur324 Nagpur301 Rajkot253 Agra219 Amritsar210 Cuttack204 Lucknow185 Calcutta151 Panaji128 Guwahati127 Patna123 Telangana122 SC106 Ranchi104 Dehradun102 Jodhpur91 Jabalpur80 Allahabad37 Varanasi26 Kerala23 Rajasthan12 Punjab & Haryana12 Orissa10 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 Gauhati2 Andhra Pradesh2 Himachal Pradesh2 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

Key Topics

Section 26356 Section 143(3)38 Addition to Income32 Deduction27 Section 54B25 Disallowance24 Capital Gains22 Section 80I20 Section 2819

SANJEEV KUMAR KATHURIA,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 , YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 329/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

capital gains'. Where the gains arise on transfer of a short-term capital asset as defined under section 2(42A), the gains

SH. ANIKET SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Showing 1–20 of 731 · Page 1 of 37

...

Long Term Capital Gains11

Section 45(5)10

ITA 719/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Srinivastava, Spl.Counsel

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 153ASection 153A(1)Section 250(6)

capital gain as discussed above. 28. There were certain other assessee’s/beneficiaries who have taken long-term capital gain on the sale

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 708/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Srinivastava, Spl.Counsel

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 153ASection 153A(1)Section 250(6)

capital gain as discussed above. 28. There were certain other assessee’s/beneficiaries who have taken long-term capital gain on the sale

SH. SANJAY SINGAL HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 705/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Srinivastava, Spl.Counsel

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 153ASection 153A(1)Section 250(6)

capital gain as discussed above. 28. There were certain other assessee’s/beneficiaries who have taken long-term capital gain on the sale

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 714/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Srinivastava, Spl.Counsel

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 153ASection 153A(1)Section 250(6)

capital gain as discussed above. 28. There were certain other assessee’s/beneficiaries who have taken long-term capital gain on the sale

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 710/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Srinivastava, Spl.Counsel

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 153ASection 153A(1)Section 250(6)

capital gain as discussed above. 28. There were certain other assessee’s/beneficiaries who have taken long-term capital gain on the sale

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 711/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Srinivastava, Spl.Counsel

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 153ASection 153A(1)Section 250(6)

capital gain as discussed above. 28. There were certain other assessee’s/beneficiaries who have taken long-term capital gain on the sale

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 717/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Srinivastava, Spl.Counsel

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 153ASection 153A(1)Section 250(6)

capital gain as discussed above. 28. There were certain other assessee’s/beneficiaries who have taken long-term capital gain on the sale

SH. ANIKET SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 718/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Srinivastava, Spl.Counsel

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 153ASection 153A(1)Section 250(6)

capital gain as discussed above. 28. There were certain other assessee’s/beneficiaries who have taken long-term capital gain on the sale

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 716/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-

For Respondent: Shri G.C. Srinivastava, Spl.Counsel

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 153ASection 153A(1)Section 250(6)

capital gain as discussed above. 28. There were certain other assessee’s/beneficiaries who have taken long-term capital gain on the sale

SH. AMAR SINGH,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

ITA 365/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit GoelFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

capital gain on pro rata basis. The appellant has not offered the capital gain on the entire sale proceed as the balance

SH. JAI RAM,JAGADHARI vs. ITO, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, both the appeal of different assessees are allowed

ITA 366/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit GoelFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

capital gain on pro rata basis. The appellant has not offered the capital gain on the entire sale proceed as the balance

HET RAM SHARMA,MANDI vs. ITO, , SUNDERNAGAR

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 482/CHANDI/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri. Het Ram Sharma Vs. The Ito Vill & P.O. Tattapani Sundernagar Tehsil Karsog Mandi, H.P. Mandi, H.P.

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. GuptaFor Respondent: Sh. Akhilesh Gupta

Section 148Section 45Section 54

capital gain and the other as short term capital gain. The Hon’ble High Court held the capital gain to be long

DHEERUMAL SHARMA,MANDI vs. ITO, SUNDERNAGAR

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 483/CHANDI/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri. Het Ram Sharma Vs. The Ito Vill & P.O. Tattapani Sundernagar Tehsil Karsog Mandi, H.P. Mandi, H.P.

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. GuptaFor Respondent: Sh. Akhilesh Gupta

Section 148Section 45Section 54

capital gain and the other as short term capital gain. The Hon’ble High Court held the capital gain to be long

SHRI KRISHAN KUMAR JALAN,BANGALORE vs. ITO, W-1, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 933/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: \nShri P.K. Prasad, Advocate &For Respondent: \nDr. Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253Section 68

capital gains are sham\ntransactions entered only to give colour of genuineness_and therefore,\nheld that the capital gain arising

RAJNI JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

ITA 142/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

Capital Gain in respect of Gold Coin and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of shares of ‘Spice Jet Ltd’, ‘Hind

TARUN JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

ITA 144/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

Capital Gain in respect of Gold Coin and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of shares of ‘Spice Jet Ltd’, ‘Hind

SHRI SANJAY JAIN,BATHINDA vs. PR.CIT(CENTRAL), LUDHIANA

ITA 140/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

Capital Gain in respect of Gold Coin and Long Term Capital Gain on sale of shares of ‘Spice Jet Ltd’, ‘Hind

SIKANDER SINGH MALUKA,MOHALI vs. ITO, MOHALI

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

ITA 633/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe I.T.O., Vs. Sh.Sikandar Singh Maluka, Ward 5(1), # 1370, Sector 40-B, Chandigarh. Chandigarh Pan: Abzpm7206N & Sh.Sikandar Singh Maluka, Vs. The I.T.O., # 1370, Sector 40-B, Ward 5(2), Chandigarh. Chandigarh Pan: Abzpm7206N

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh

Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)(ii)Section 2(47)(v)Section 269Section 53ASection 54

Capital Gains to the extent of capital gain earned on plots actually transferred during the year following the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional

M/S SANJAY SINGAL HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 610/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

capital gain and bogus share capital / share premium/ unsecured loan. Such statements under Section 132(4) of the Act, by Shri