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.

28 results for “capital gains”+ Section 221clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi412Mumbai342Chennai156Bangalore138Karnataka106Ahmedabad106Jaipur95Hyderabad54Kolkata50Raipur30Chandigarh28Pune24Cochin21Lucknow18Calcutta17Surat16Visakhapatnam16Indore15Rajkot12Cuttack11Guwahati5Nagpur5SC5Telangana5Kerala3Jodhpur3Agra2Dehradun2Rajasthan2Orissa2Andhra Pradesh1Panaji1Varanasi1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 13(3)24Section 14823Addition to Income20Section 19516Section 916Section 14713Exemption13Section 13210Section 1519

SANJAY SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 220/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

221 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sanjay Singal (HUF) बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi Central Circle-1 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMHS8301N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

Section 408
Deduction7
Capital Gains6

SANJAY SINGAL (HUF),NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 221/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

221 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sanjay Singal (HUF) बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi Central Circle-1 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMHS8301N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal

AARTI SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 217/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

221 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sanjay Singal (HUF) बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi Central Circle-1 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMHS8301N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal

AARTI SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 218/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

221 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sanjay Singal (HUF) बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi Central Circle-1 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMHS8301N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal

ANIKET SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 219/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

221 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 Sanjay Singal (HUF) बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi Central Circle-1 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMHS8301N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.A and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal

RADHA MITTAL,LUDHIANA vs. ITO- WARD 7(3), LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in light

ITA 1140/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavradha Mittal, Ito बनाम H. No. 85-A, Aggar Nagar, Ward- 7(3), Ludhiana- 141012 Ludhiana

For Appellant: Shri Sarabjit Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

221 (Cal.) • ITO v. Rajender Prasad Gupta (2010) 48 DTR 489 (JD) (Trib.) 5. It was further submitted that the notice u/s 148 was issued on the ground that the assessee has not disclosed the amount of long term capital gains on sale of shares whereas in the computation of income as per the original return of income as well

ROSHA ALLOYS P LIMITED, AMLOH ROAD, VILLAGE TURAN, MANDI GOBINDGARH,PUNJAB vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 888/CHANDI/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-2019
Section 148BSection 151

221 ITR 53 (SC), wherein it\nwas held that grant of approval must not be a mere formality, but a\njudicial function to be exercised with due care, application of mind,\nand examination of relevant material. This legal position has been\nconsistently upheld by various High Courts and reaffirmed by the\nHon'ble Supreme Court in multiple cases, reinforcing that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 921/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-19
Section 148BSection 151

221 ITR 53 (SC), wherein it\n11\nwas held that grant of approval must not be a mere formality, but a\njudicial function to be exercised with due care, application of mind,\nand examination of relevant material. This legal position has been\nconsistently upheld by various High Courts and reaffirmed by the\nHon'ble Supreme Court in multiple cases, reinforcing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 922/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2019-20
Section 148BSection 151

221 ITR 53 (SC), wherein it\n11\nwas held that grant of approval must not be a mere formality, but a\njudicial function to be exercised with due care, application of mind,\nand examination of relevant material. This legal position has been\nconsistently upheld by various High Courts and reaffirmed by the\nHon'ble Supreme Court in multiple cases, reinforcing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 923/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2020-21
Section 148BSection 151

221 ITR 53 (SC), wherein it\n\n11\nwas held that grant of approval must not be a mere formality, but a\njudicial function to be exercised with due care, application of mind,\nand examination of relevant material. This legal position has been\nconsistently upheld by various High Courts and reaffirmed by the\nHon'ble Supreme Court in multiple cases

M/S SHUBHAM COTTON MILLS PVT. LTD.,ELLENABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1416/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Oct 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234Section 234B

gains", is a loss, the assessee shall be entitled to have the amount of such loss set off against his income from any other source under the same head. (2) Where the result of the computation made for any assessment year under sections 48 to 55 in respect of any short-term capital asset is a loss, the assessee shall

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME YARNS LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 932/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 May 2018AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. D.S. Kalyan
Section 195Section 40Section 9

capital asset situate in India; [Explanation I]: For the purposes of this clause— (a) in the case of a business of which all the operations are not carried out in India, the income of the business deemed under this clause to accrue or arise in India shall be only such part of the income as is reasonably attributable

DCIT, C-4(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME YARNS LTD,, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1321/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 May 2018AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. D.S. Kalyan
Section 195Section 40Section 9

capital asset situate in India; [Explanation I]: For the purposes of this clause— (a) in the case of a business of which all the operations are not carried out in India, the income of the business deemed under this clause to accrue or arise in India shall be only such part of the income as is reasonably attributable

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME TEXTILES INDUSTRIES LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 933/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 May 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. D.S. Kalyan
Section 195Section 40Section 9

capital asset situate in India; [Explanation I]: For the purposes of this clause— (a) in the case of a business of which all the operations are not carried out in India, the income of the business deemed under this clause to accrue or arise in India shall be only such part of the income as is reasonably attributable

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S WINSOME YARNS LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 804/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 May 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri. Tej Mohan SinghFor Respondent: Shri. D.S. Kalyan
Section 195Section 40Section 9

capital asset situate in India; [Explanation I]: For the purposes of this clause— (a) in the case of a business of which all the operations are not carried out in India, the income of the business deemed under this clause to accrue or arise in India shall be only such part of the income as is reasonably attributable

M/S STATE BANK OF PATIALA,,PATIALA vs. ACIT,, PATIALA

ITA 385/CHANDI/2008[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jul 2018AY 2000-01

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

For Appellant: Shri. C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri. Manu Malik
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 36Section 36(1)(viia)

221/-. 6 That the whole order is against the provisions of law and facts of the case and right is reserved to assail the same on such other grounds as may be advanced at the time of hearing for which the appellant requests leave to amend, vary from or add to the ground of appeal hereinabove appearing

M/S STATE BANK OF PATIALA,,PATIALA vs. ACIT,, PATIALA

ITA 384/CHANDI/2008[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jul 2018AY 1999-2000

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

For Appellant: Shri. C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri. Manu Malik
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 234DSection 36Section 36(1)(viia)

221/-. 6 That the whole order is against the provisions of law and facts of the case and right is reserved to assail the same on such other grounds as may be advanced at the time of hearing for which the appellant requests leave to amend, vary from or add to the ground of appeal hereinabove appearing

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

gain won various Awards and Appreciations over a period of time from the State and other high dignitaries at the state level and all India Level in appreciation of the services provided by them towards the field of education and setting up of infrastructure for imparting quality education. That befits them to be in the key roles assigned to them

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 30/CHANDI/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

gain won various Awards and Appreciations over a period of time from the State and other high dignitaries at the state level and all India Level in appreciation of the services provided by them towards the field of education and setting up of infrastructure for imparting quality education. That befits them to be in the key roles assigned to them

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 137/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 May 2021AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT-DR
Section 13(3)

gain won various Awards and Appreciations over a period of time from the State and other high dignitaries at the state level and all India Level in appreciation of the services provided by them towards the field of education and setting up of infrastructure for imparting quality education. That befits them to be in the key roles assigned to them