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.

483 results for “capital gains”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,028Delhi1,718Ahmedabad661Jaipur489Chennai483Bangalore423Kolkata379Hyderabad306Pune295Surat228Indore189Chandigarh175Karnataka129Raipur94Visakhapatnam94Agra91Nagpur73Rajkot68Cochin63Lucknow63Cuttack49Amritsar40Calcutta39Ranchi29Patna24Dehradun22SC19Jodhpur17Guwahati17Telangana14Allahabad8Panaji7Varanasi6Jabalpur5Punjab & Haryana3Gauhati1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Orissa1Rajasthan1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)86Penalty63Section 14A56Addition to Income46Section 143(3)37Section 153A30Section 270A30Section 271D30Capital Gains29Section 234E

MOSBACHER INDIA LLC,CHENNAI vs. ADDL. DIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1085/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2016AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 42(2)Section 42(2)(b)

capital gain, in the present assessment year. Our giving in, if we may say so, to this bait could infact jeopardise legitimate interests of the revenue inasmuch as once this income is held to be taxable in assessment year 2010-11, this treatment of income could straightaway close the doors of taxability of this income in the assessment year

ARTHI BALIGA,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NFAC, , DELHI

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

ITA 1559/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025

Showing 1–20 of 483 · Page 1 of 25

...
26
Disallowance26
Section 80H24
AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1559/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arthi Baliga, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 15, Flat No. 3-C, Coral Woods Income Tax, Chennai-4, Apartment, Sri Ram Nagar, South Chennai. Street, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Bkjpb5416P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate & Shri Varun Ranganathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-4, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset by way of distribution of capital assets on the dissolution of a firm or other association of persons or body of individuals (not being a company or a co-operative society) or otherwise, shall be chargeable to tax as the income of the firm, association or body of the previous year

SRI K.SRIKANTH,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

ITA 1016/CHNY/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

penalty to be levied in case terms and conditions of the agreement are violated . Thus, as per AO these agreements are sham agreements which are not enforceable at law and entire consideration received by assessee and his minor child were held to be chargeable to tax as capital gains

SHRI K.SRIKANTH,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

ITA 307/CHNY/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

penalty to be levied in case terms and conditions of the agreement are violated . Thus, as per AO these agreements are sham agreements which are not enforceable at law and entire consideration received by assessee and his minor child were held to be chargeable to tax as capital gains

SRI K.SRIKANTH,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

ITA 1015/CHNY/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

penalty to be levied in case terms and conditions of the agreement are violated . Thus, as per AO these agreements are sham agreements which are not enforceable at law and entire consideration received by assessee and his minor child were held to be chargeable to tax as capital gains

ACIT,, CHENNAI vs. SRI. K.SRIKANTH,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the four appeals adjudicated by us in this order are partly allowed

ITA 1324/CHNY/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2020AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Dr. M.Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

penalty to be levied in case terms and conditions of the agreement are violated . Thus, as per AO these agreements are sham agreements which are not enforceable at law and entire consideration received by assessee and his minor child were held to be chargeable to tax as capital gains

PENTA MEDIA GRAPHICS LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1402/CHNY/2015[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 May 2023AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1402/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2000-01 M/S. Penta Media Graphics Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of ‘Taurus’, No. 25, First Main Road, Vs. Income Tax, Media Circle I, Room No. 311, 3Rd Floor, New Block, United India Colony, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaacp1647B] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & : Smt. Sree Valli Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By None [Dept. Letter Submission] : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 12.04.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 14, Chennai Dated 30.03.2015 Passed Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

penalty order dated 28.03.2012 and the relevant portion of the order is extracted as under: 11 I.T.A. No. 1402/Chny/2015 10. I have carefully considered the assessee's reply and not accepted for the following reasons: (a) The assessee has failed to admit any capital gain

LAKSHMANAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 1 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2744/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2882/Chny/2018 & नि◌धा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Mr.Lakshmanan, The Income Tax Officer, No.7/2, 1St Floor, Akm Nest, Non-Corporate Ward-1(3), Jawaharlal Nehru Street, T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 017. [Pan: Aabpl 4326 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.T. Vasudevan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 43(5)Section 45

penalty was improper. 5. The CIT(A), in any event, ought to have seen that the addition in assessment was a result of changing the head of income from Capital Gains

LAKSHMANAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO N.C.W 1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2882/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2882/Chny/2018 & नि◌धा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Mr.Lakshmanan, The Income Tax Officer, No.7/2, 1St Floor, Akm Nest, Non-Corporate Ward-1(3), Jawaharlal Nehru Street, T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 017. [Pan: Aabpl 4326 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.T. Vasudevan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 43(5)Section 45

penalty was improper. 5. The CIT(A), in any event, ought to have seen that the addition in assessment was a result of changing the head of income from Capital Gains

LAKSHMANAN REVATHI,CHENNAI vs. ITO N.C.W 1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2883/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2882/Chny/2018 & नि◌धा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Mr.Lakshmanan, The Income Tax Officer, No.7/2, 1St Floor, Akm Nest, Non-Corporate Ward-1(3), Jawaharlal Nehru Street, T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 017. [Pan: Aabpl 4326 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.T. Vasudevan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan
Section 43(5)Section 45

penalty was improper. 5. The CIT(A), in any event, ought to have seen that the addition in assessment was a result of changing the head of income from Capital Gains

S.SATHYANARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 754/CHNY/2015[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Aug 2019AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao]

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 271

Capital Gain : 10,92,758/- The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s.271 (1) (c) of the Act by issuing show

S.SATHYANARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 756/CHNY/2015[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Aug 2019AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao]

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 271

Capital Gain : 10,92,758/- The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s.271 (1) (c) of the Act by issuing show

S.SATHYANARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 755/CHNY/2015[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Aug 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao]

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 271

Capital Gain : 10,92,758/- The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s.271 (1) (c) of the Act by issuing show

ADVENT COMPUTER SERVICES LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, COMPANY WARD 1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 222/CHNY/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Nov 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.222/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) M/S. Advent Computer Services Ltd., Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of C/O.M/S. Anil Nair Associates Income Tax, Casa Blanca, 1St Floor,11,Casa Major Company Ward-1(1), Road. Egmore, Chennai-600 034. Chennai-600 008. Pan:Aacea 0326L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act by the Assessing Officer. 2. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that omission of inclusion of capital gain

D.RAMGOPAL,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), COIMBATORE

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 581/CHNY/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.581/Chny/2022 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri D. Ramagopal Acit बनाम C/O.Mr. G.V. Jhabakh (Fca) Central Circle-1 157, P.M Swamy Colony, Coimbatore. / Vs. 5Th Street, Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akgpr-3621-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Jhabakh(Ca)- Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 18-03-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Jhabakh(CA)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271F

capital gains; (ii) Cash deposits in bank account; (iii) Agricultural income. 1.2 The Ld. AR advanced arguments supporting the case of the assessee. The written submissions have also been filed. The Ld. CIT-DR has supported the findings given in the assessment order as well as in the appellate order. Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed

PREMA,CHENGALPATTU vs. ITO, NCW-22(1), TAMBARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2324/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.S.P.Chidambaram
Section 139(1)Section 50C

capital gains from such transfer of property and thereafter, the AO to proceed against the assessee in accordance to law for levy of penalty

PREMA,CHENGALPATTU vs. ITO, NCQ-22(1), TAMBARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2323/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.S.P.Chidambaram
Section 139(1)Section 50C

capital gains from such transfer of property and thereafter, the AO to proceed against the assessee in accordance to law for levy of penalty

PREMA,CHENGALPATTU vs. ITO, NCW-22(1), TAMBARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2322/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.S.P.Chidambaram
Section 139(1)Section 50C

capital gains from such transfer of property and thereafter, the AO to proceed against the assessee in accordance to law for levy of penalty

PREMA,CHENGALPATTU vs. ITO, NCW-22(1), TAMBARAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2321/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.S.P.Chidambaram
Section 139(1)Section 50C

capital gains from such transfer of property and thereafter, the AO to proceed against the assessee in accordance to law for levy of penalty

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. INDO INTERNATIONAL LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 58/CHNY/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.58/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Indo International Ltd., No.18, 1St Floor, Sunkurama Street, Income Tax, V. Company Circle – Ii(3), Chennai - 600 001. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aaaci 2408 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. B. Nischal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 2Section 271(1)(c)Section 50Section 56(1)

penalty. Hence, according to the Ld. D.R., when the capital gain has to be assessed as short-term capital gain