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.

3 results for “capital gains”+ Section 282clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai156Delhi125Bangalore97Jaipur72Panaji39Chennai35Kolkata27Chandigarh26Hyderabad22Pune21Amritsar20Ahmedabad19Indore18Rajkot14Lucknow13Raipur11Surat11Nagpur6Visakhapatnam5Patna5Jodhpur4Cuttack3Agra3Cochin3Allahabad1Varanasi1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 282(1)5Exemption3Section 143(3)2Section 54F2Section 12A(1)(ac)2Capital Gains2Long Term Capital Gains2Addition to Income2Natural Justice

BENEESH KUMAR,KOCHI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 1(1), KOCHI

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

ITA 1161/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Assessment Year: 2013-14 Beneesh Kumar .......... Appellant Madathuparambu House, Thattzham Road Vaduthala, Kochi 682023 [Pan: Agipb7548Q] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Non-Corporate Ward, Kochi Appellant By: Shri Ramesh Cherian, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Omanakutan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2025

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Cherian, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Omanakutan, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 282(1)Section 54Section 54F

capital gains returned by the appellant of Rs. 57,28,310/-, however denied the claim of deduction u/s. 54F as the appellant had allegedly failed to adduce proof in support of the claim made. 4. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. 5. Being aggrieved

2

PARAKKADATH SIMON VARGHESE,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION , KOCHI CIRCLE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes and the stay application stands dismissed

ITA 533/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm & Sa No. 72/Coch/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Parakkadath Simon Varghese .......... Appellant Parakkadath House, Koratty South, Thrissur [Pan: Afgpv9060G] Vs. Dcit (International Taxation), Kochi .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Gibi C. George, Advocate Revenue By: Ms. Neethu S., Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri Gibi C. George, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neethu S., Sr. DR
Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 143(3)Section 282(1)

capital gains of Rs. 27,48,000/- on sale of land as the appellant had failed to furnish information called for in support of the return of income submitted by the appellant. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal in limine for non- prosecution. 4. Being aggrieved

SUMA AYIRAMPALLIL CHANDRANGATHAN,PAIPPAD vs. ITO, WARD 2, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 159/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2016-17 Suma Ayirampallil Chandrangathan .......... Appellant Mohanalayam, Pallikachira, Vellappally Paippad, Changanassery 686537 [Pan: Aejpc1720J] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Thiruvalla .......... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K. Balaji, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 282(1)

capital gain. The return of income for AY 2016-17 was filed on 22.12.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 2,83,780/-. The said return of income was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act vide intimation dated 20.03.2017 assessing the taxable income at Rs.1,44,401/-. 2 Suma Ayirampallil Chandrangathan 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before