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.

1,581 results for “capital gains”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,789Delhi2,966Chennai1,581Bangalore1,390Kolkata1,263Ahmedabad980Pune582Jaipur553Hyderabad510Surat374Indore364Chandigarh310Karnataka270Cochin243Raipur174Visakhapatnam146Lucknow127Nagpur108Rajkot108Cuttack106Calcutta100Guwahati80Amritsar72SC56Patna46Agra45Telangana45Panaji42Ranchi39Jodhpur29Dehradun22Jabalpur20Kerala12Varanasi11Allahabad11Rajasthan7Orissa4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Andhra Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana2Gauhati2D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Himachal Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 14A58Section 143(3)57Disallowance57Addition to Income56Deduction52Section 54F43Section 5435Capital Gains33Section 4032Section 147

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE SUBRAMANIAN SARAVANAN, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Re

ITA 1132/CHNY/2023[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 54F

exempt from the capital gain tax and if so to what extent? residential house is exempt from the capital gain

SHRI RAMALINGAM NAGARAJAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 21 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1729/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jan 2023

Showing 1–20 of 1,581 · Page 1 of 80

...
31
Section 14829
Exemption28
AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mr.N.Arjunraj, CAFor Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 54Section 54(2)

capital gains to the extent of the utilization of the exempted capital gains without routing through the prescribed capital gains

INCOME TAX OFFICER NON-CORPORATE WARD-10(6), CHENNAI vs. SHRI ARUN GUPTA,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 844/CHNY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 844/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Income-Tax Officer, Shri. Arun Gupta, Non-Corporate Ward -10(6), V. No. 3B, Block, Lloyds Colony, Chennai – 34. Lloyds Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014. [Pan: Agrpa-8340-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. N.V. Balaji Advocate & Mrs. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.11.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.11.2022

For Respondent: Shri. N.V. Balaji Advocate &
Section 139(1)Section 54Section 54E

capital gains from sale of property and claimed exemption u/s. 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :-3-: ITA. No:844 /Chny/2020

ADHI KUMARA GURU,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NCC-22(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 120/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaमाननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम"

For Appellant: Mr. P.M. Kathir, Advocate for Mr.G.Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

exemption in respect of capital gains arising from the sale of vacant land on respect of capital gains arising from

ANNIRUTHA RAGHUVEER,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allow

ITA 2239/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shrimanoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. D. Babitha, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(2)

exemption u/s. 54 of the Act on the ground that assessee didn’t utilize/reinvest the capital gain the Act on the ground

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. KANNAN SANTHANAM, CHENNAI

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

ITA 636/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Sept 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.636/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Assistant Commissioner Of Shri Kannan Santhanam, Income Tax, V. 401-A Laures 59-60, Non Corporate Circle 16, C.P. Ramasamy Road, Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 018. Pan : Aahps 1094 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCITFor Respondent: Shri P.B. Srinivasan, CA
Section 139(1)Section 2Section 54

capital gain at `64,84,686/-. The assessee explained before the Assessing Officer that a sum of `99,00,000/- was invested before the date of filing of return under Section 139(1) of the Act and claimed the exemption

SMT. BIMALA DEVI AGARWAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 422/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 422/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

capital gain exemption from its transaction in the shares of Dhanlab Merchandise merged with M/s. Bakra Pratisthan Ltd. The AO had not examined

SMT. SHOBA AGARWAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENT CIRCLE 3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 421/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 421/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. R. Mohan Reddy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

capital gain exemption from its transaction in the shares of Dhanlab Merchandise merged with M/s. Bakra Pratisthan Ltd. The AO had not examined

SHRI VINOD BANSAL,CHENNAI vs. ACI-CENT. CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 445/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkery, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 445/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

capital gain exemption from its transaction in the shares of Dhanlab Merchandise merged with M/s. Bakra Pratisthan Ltd. The AO had not examined

PANKAJ AGARWAL,CHENNAI vs. PCIT , CHENAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 434/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 434/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

capital gain exemption from its transaction in the shares of Dhanlab Merchandise merged with M/s. Bakra Pratisthan Ltd. The AO had not examined

SMT.RITA AGARWAL ,CHENAI vs. PCIT , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 433/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 433/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

capital gain exemption from its transaction in the shares of Dhanlab Merchandise merged with M/s. Bakra Pratisthan Ltd. The AO had not examined

V.KALPAGAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 10(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3034/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3034/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Smt. V. Kalpagam, The Income Tax Officer, No.2, Door No. 9, Raja V. Non Corporate Ward 10(2), Sadhan, Gajapathy Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010. [Pan: Ahupk-0879-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2023

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT

capital gains after claiming exemption u/s. 54F of the Act. The assessee claimed that, although the year of taxability of capital

ITO(EXCEMPTION) TRICHY, TRICHY vs. GRAMA VIDIYAL TRUST, TRICHY

In the result, both ITA No

ITA 1535/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.1534 & 1535/Chny/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Income-Tax Officer, Grama Vidiyal Trust, (Exemptions), Trichy Vs. No. 44, Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy-620001 (Pan: Aaatg2928F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri N. V. Balaji, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Arv. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 31.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Appeals By Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Trichy Vide Ita No. 156/2017-18/Cit(A)-1/Try Dated 04.03.2019 & 163/2017-18/Cit(A)-1/Try Dated 22.02.2019 Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Ito, Exemptions Ward, Trichy, Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act), Both Dated 30.12.2017 For Ays 2009-10 & 2011-12. 2. First We Take Up Ita No. 1534/Chny/2019 For Ay 2009-10 For Which The Revised Ground Taken By The Revenue Is As Under:

For Appellant: Shri N. V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

capital gains claimed as exempt u/s. 11(1A) of the Act by holding that since exemption u/s. 11 is denied

ITO(EXCEMPTION) TRICHY, TRICHY vs. GRAMA VIDIYAL TRUST, TRICHY

In the result, both ITA No

ITA 1534/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.1534 & 1535/Chny/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Income-Tax Officer, Grama Vidiyal Trust, (Exemptions), Trichy Vs. No. 44, Williams Road, Cantonment, Trichy-620001 (Pan: Aaatg2928F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri N. V. Balaji, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Arv. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 31.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Appeals By Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Trichy Vide Ita No. 156/2017-18/Cit(A)-1/Try Dated 04.03.2019 & 163/2017-18/Cit(A)-1/Try Dated 22.02.2019 Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Ito, Exemptions Ward, Trichy, Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act), Both Dated 30.12.2017 For Ays 2009-10 & 2011-12. 2. First We Take Up Ita No. 1534/Chny/2019 For Ay 2009-10 For Which The Revised Ground Taken By The Revenue Is As Under:

For Appellant: Shri N. V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

capital gains claimed as exempt u/s. 11(1A) of the Act by holding that since exemption u/s. 11 is denied

NATESAN EKAMBARAM,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the ground of appeal raised by the assessee on this issue stands allowed

ITA 2873/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2873/Chny/2024 धनिाारणिर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Natesan Ekambaram, Dcit, 1/115, Bajanai Kovil Vs. Central Circle -1(2), Street, Chennai. Perumbakkam, Medavakkam Post, Chennai – 601 302 [Pan:Ackpe-6757-C] (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) (अपीलाथी/Appellant) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr.K.Vishwa Padmanabhan, Ca. प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Mr.C.Sivakumar , Addl.Cit.

For Appellant: Mr.K.Vishwa Padmanabhan, CAFor Respondent: Mr.C.Sivakumar , Addl.CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54

capital gain exemption is allowed to the assessee. Thus, the Capital gains earned by the assessee out of this transaction

M.KIRAN KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI

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

ITA 3374/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri G.Baskar, Advocate
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 2(22)(e)

gains of Rs.16,24,68,072/- disallowing the exempt u/s.10(38) as undisclosed income from other sources. 14.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding in rejection of the claim of exemption u/s 10(38) on the long term capital

C.ARYAMA SUNDARAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1208/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Durai Pandian, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(1)

exemption from Capital Gains if the construction of the new property was completed within a period of 3 years from

CHANDRA BHAVANI SANKAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 16(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 101/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.101/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. Shri Chandra Bhavani Sankar, The Ito, 1/3A, Vinayakar Koil Street, Ncw-16(2), Thalambur, Chennai. Chennai-600 130. [Pan: Aeypb 1764 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayanan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 54(1)Section 54FSection 68

capital gain from transfer of the residential house is exempt from the capital gain tax and if so to what

M.B.VENKATESH,CHENNAI vs. ITO COMPANY WARD II(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 668/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.668/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT
Section 54Section 54(1)Section 54F

capital gain. 23. At the cost of repetition, it it reiterated that exemption of capital gain from being charged to income

LATE S. YOGARATHINAM, REP. BY L/H Y. SHANMUGA DURAI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 626/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:626/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 Shri Y. Shanmuga Durai, L/H Of Acit Late S.Yogarathinam Vs. Circle -1(2) Old No.24, No.14, Chennai. 17/24, Ramanathan Street, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Pan: Aakpy-9845-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.03.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2025

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. AR.V. Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 122Section 2(47)Section 250Section 45Section 47

capital gains u/s 45 of the Act. viii) The exemption provided u/s 47(ii) is not applicable, since the combined