Search: section 68 | 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.

276 results for “section 68”+ Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,203 Delhi2,313 Bangalore953 Kolkata678 Ahmedabad672 Chennai615 Jaipur565 Hyderabad337 Surat297 Pune286 Chandigarh276 Indore248 Karnataka153 Cochin142 Nagpur122 Raipur108 Agra82 Calcutta81 Rajkot76 Lucknow73 Visakhapatnam72 Cuttack72 Guwahati63 Amritsar58 Panaji31 Jodhpur30 Ranchi24 Telangana23 SC23 Patna19 Allahabad15 Jabalpur12 Dehradun11 Rajasthan8 Kerala7 Varanasi7 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 Orissa1 Gauhati1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Addition to Income52 Section 10(38)37 Section 153A32 Section 6828 Section 13225 Section 26324 Section 143(3)22 Long Term Capital Gains21 Section 40A(3)

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 unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 30. In response to such show cause notice

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

Showing 1–20 of 276 · Page 1 of 14

...

20

Section 250(6)18

Capital Gains14

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 unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 30. In response to such show cause notice

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 unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 30. In response to such show cause notice

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 unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 30. In response to such show cause notice

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 unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 30. In response to such show cause notice

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 unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 30. In response to such show cause notice

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

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 unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 30. In response to such show cause notice

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 unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 30. In response to such show cause notice

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 unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 30. In response to such show cause notice

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 sale of agricultural land and in denying the deduction under section 54B of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that assessee had sold land for consideration of Rs. 1,92,01,875/- through Registered Sale Deed dated 20.03.2007. The sale consideration comprised of Rs. 68

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 sale of agricultural land and in denying the deduction under section 54B of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that assessee had sold land for consideration of Rs. 1,92,01,875/- through Registered Sale Deed dated 20.03.2007. The sale consideration comprised of Rs. 68

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 Gain\namounting to Rs.1,04,06,769/- on sale of shares which was claimed as\nExempt Income under Section 10(38)of the Act.\n2.8 That after examining the information and written submissions\nfurnished from time to time, taking into consideration the sworn\nstatements, the assessment is completed as under:-\nIncome as returned by the Assessee\nUnexplained credit

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 of Rs.18,31,36,042/- are sham transactions, not requiring to be added back either under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, as held by the ld. CIT(A), or under Section 68

SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 655/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 of Rs.18,31,36,042/- are sham transactions, not requiring to be added back either under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, as held by the ld. CIT(A), or under Section 68

M/S SATWANT AGRO ENGINEERS,BHAWANIGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PATIALA

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

ITA 753/CHANDI/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69A

section 68 can be made in the hand of the firm in respect of credits to the partner's capital account in firm. Further it is submitted that credit entry in capital account of partners was surrendered in firm which was duly accepted by department so in case of firm the addition/surrendered amount should be assessed as business income which

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 of Rs. 5,580/- on purchase and sale of gold coins on the same day and taxable at the maximum rate of income tax. As such, the assessment made by the AO is not erroneous and prejudicial to interest of revenue as observed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana. 6. That the learned Principal

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 of Rs. 5,580/- on purchase and sale of gold coins on the same day and taxable at the maximum rate of income tax. As such, the assessment made by the AO is not erroneous and prejudicial to interest of revenue as observed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana. 6. That the learned Principal

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 of Rs. 5,580/- on purchase and sale of gold coins on the same day and taxable at the maximum rate of income tax. As such, the assessment made by the AO is not erroneous and prejudicial to interest of revenue as observed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Ludhiana. 6. That the learned Principal

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SMT. MANJIT KAUR, CHANDIGARH

ITA 45/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

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

Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Capital gains ". Section 45 is a charging section. For the purpose of imposing the charge, Parliament has enacted detailed provisions in order to compute ITA Nos.41 to 44, 387, 45 to 54/Chd/17 & CO 16-to 30-Chd-2018- Shri Kulwant Singh & Others, Mohali 8 the profits or gains under that head. No existing principle or provision at variance with them

DCIT, CHANDIGARH vs. SH. KULWANT SINGH, MOHALI

ITA 387/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

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

Section 139(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Capital gains ". Section 45 is a charging section. For the purpose of imposing the charge, Parliament has enacted detailed provisions in order to compute ITA Nos.41 to 44, 387, 45 to 54/Chd/17 & CO 16-to 30-Chd-2018- Shri Kulwant Singh & Others, Mohali 8 the profits or gains under that head. No existing principle or provision at variance with them