BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 145Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi87Chandigarh80Cochin59Mumbai51Hyderabad7Chennai4Bangalore4Jaipur4Kolkata4Rajkot4Ahmedabad2Pune1Panaji1Visakhapatnam1

Key Topics

Section 56(2)(viii)6Section 1484Section 10(37)4Section 143(2)3Section 142(1)3Section 148A3Addition to Income3Section 143(3)2Section 145A2

VEERASWAMY JOTHEESWARAN,TIRUVALLUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, TIRUVALLUR

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

ITA 1756/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Chennai12 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Y. Sudarshan, JCIT
Section 10(37)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 56(2)(vii)

capital gains’ ------ [2021] 126 taxmann.com 105 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Mahender Pal Narang v. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Ministry of Finance* ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN AND HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ. :- 5 -: SLP APPEAL (C) NO. 3021 OF 2021 MARCH 4, 2021 Section 56, read with sections 10(37), 45 and 145A

ABDULRAHMAN LIYAKATHALI,ERODE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, ERODE

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

ITA 1617/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1617/Chny/2025 'नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Abdulrahman Liyakathali, Acit, No.30/3, Bhavani Main Road, Vs. Circle-1, B.P.Agraharam, Erode. Erode – 638 005. [Pan: Abapl-5028-J] (अपीलाथ)/Appellant) (*+यथ)/Respondent) अपीलाथ) क, ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate *+यथ) क, ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T. सुनवाई क, तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2025 घोषणा क, तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 54B

section 145A(a)(i) of the Act. 8. The assessee further submitted before the AO that the business was in the process of closure and, consequently, the finished leather had lost its marketability on account of fungal deterioration. It was stated that approximately 40% of the opening stock remained unsold and continued as closing stock. The assessee explained that during

DEVARAYA PILLAI SUBRAMANIAN,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), SALEM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 561/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 561/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year:2017-18 Devaraya Pillai Subramanian, Ito 58A, Sathyamoorthy Street, Vs. Ward – 1(1), Salem – 636 001. Salem. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Aijps-3267-J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, Jcit

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, JCIT
Section 56(2)(viii)

145A, Section 145B, Section 56(2)(viii) & Section 57(iv) by the Finance (No.2) Act. 2009 did not change the character of interest u/s.28 of the Land Acquisition Act from capital receipt forming part of enhanced compensation as envisaged in section 45(5) of the Act to revenue receipt' chargeable to tax as income from other sources

MALINI,THIRUNINDRAVUR vs. ACIT, NCC-22(1), TAMBARAM

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2362/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.:2362/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2018-19 Malini, The Assistant Commissioner Of 7, Ganapathy Puram, Near Vs. Income Tax, Ragvendra Nagar, Periyapalayam Non Corporate Circle 22(1), (Tbm), Road, Thiruninravur 602 024, Chennai. Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Ajspm-9167-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2025 घोषणाक"तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 25.06.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2018-19. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 17 Days. The Assessee Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Explaining Reasons For The Said Delay & Prayed For Condonation Of That Delay. On Perusal Of The Condonation Petition & Upon Hearing The Ld. Ar & Ld. Dr, We Find That The Reasons Explained By The Assessee Are Bonafide & Therefore, The Delay Is Condoned & Admitted The Appeal For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 145ASection 250Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

section 145A(b) of the Act. So far as addition made towards unsecured loan is concerned, the ld. CIT(A) gave relief to the assessee, on that the Revenue has not preferred any appeal before the ITAT. 6. On being aggrieved against confirmation of the addition made by the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT