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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 211clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi382Mumbai364Bangalore201Chennai141Karnataka118Kolkata95Ahmedabad79Hyderabad78Jaipur75Calcutta53Chandigarh51Raipur48Pune43Visakhapatnam31Cochin27Indore20Guwahati18Surat17Lucknow12Kerala9Telangana8SC6Ranchi6Nagpur5Agra4Cuttack4Rajasthan3Rajkot3Amritsar2Jodhpur2Panaji2Varanasi1Patna1Jabalpur1Punjab & Haryana1Allahabad1Andhra Pradesh1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 54F9Section 143(3)7Section 44A6Section 2635Section 543Addition to Income3Section 1482Section 372Deduction2

HI-TECH ESTATES & PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 391/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri B.D.Ojha , ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

211 of the Company Act, 1956.”. 31. From para 6 of the impugned revisionary order of Pr. CIT, we observe that the revisionary authority only picked up first half part of said clause 2(d) of auditor’s report and thereafter held that the company has not made disclosure as required by paragraphs 38 to 43 of AS-7. This

ITO, WARD-3(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. GAYA SANTARA, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the appeal

ITA 468/CTK/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jul 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year :2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwalla, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 148Section 54Section 54F

section 54F of the Act and wrong in holding the meaning assigning to word "a house" as "one house" and therefore the disallowance of exemption of capital gain u/s 54F is liable to be deleted. 4. Ground No.1 of the appeal of the Revenue’s appeal and Ground No.1 of the assessee’s appeal are interconnected, therefore, they are being

SHRI JALENDRA SAHOO,CUTTACK vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 9/CTK/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.09/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Shri Jalendra Sahoo, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), At-Kirtania, N.M.Padia, Bhubaneswar Bhogarai, Balasore-756081 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Blxps 3197 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Sahu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 37

section 30 to 36 and not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee), laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for purposes of the business 4 or profession shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head "Profit and gains of business or profession" Therefore, from the above facts and circumstances

SURESH KUMAR DIVAKAR,SAMBALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), , SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 129/CTK/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Jun 2023AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra and Himanshu Jena, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 44A

gains assessable on presumptive basis. However, the assessee, m the course of assessment proceedings m a submission made on 10-11-2014 vide covering letter dated 30-10- 3 2014 had submitted that income from business of supply of building materials was determined on presumptive basis u/s.44AD since no proper books of accounts were maintained by it . No adverse inference