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.

7 results for “capital gains”+ Section 49(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,650Delhi2,031Bangalore856Chennai593Ahmedabad559Kolkata500Jaipur485Hyderabad316Chandigarh300Indore196Pune190Karnataka172Cochin150Surat130Raipur103Visakhapatnam103Nagpur75Cuttack74Guwahati60Calcutta59Rajkot54Lucknow53Amritsar39SC34Telangana25Jodhpur18Agra15Jabalpur15Patna13Allahabad9Dehradun7Kerala7Ranchi7Varanasi7Rajasthan5Panaji5Andhra Pradesh2Orissa2Himachal Pradesh1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 2636Capital Gains5Addition to Income5Section 142(1)4Section 143(3)3Long Term Capital Gains3Disallowance3Set Off of Losses3Section 144

AKRAM,ROORKEE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, HARIDWAR

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 6373/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun07 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Mayank Kumar, Addl. CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148

1,509,380/-. The same may be verified from the purchase deeds and the assessee may be given relief accordingly.” 7. The facts of the present case being virtually identical to the earlier transaction entered into by the assessee, I have no hesitation in relying upon my findings in the case of the assessee in Appeal no. 2/CIT(A)/DDN/2014-15

DAVINDER KUMAR MAGO,PUNJABI BAGH vs. DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DDN, DEHRADUN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

2
Section 2492
Section 1432
Natural Justice2
ITA 17/DDN/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Davinder Kumar Mago Vs Dcit/Acit 12/1, Punjabi Bagh, Central Circle, External Punjabi Bagh, Dehradun New Delhi-110026 Uttarakhand Pan-Ajhpm9802A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. (Vc) Respondent By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 10.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.03.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order By Pr.Cit (Central), Kanpur At Meerut Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1861 (“The Act”) Dated 08.01.2026 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

section 263 which cannot be applied in the given facts of the case. He therefore, prayed for the cancellation of the revision order so passed u/s 263 of the Act. 6. Per contra, Ld. CIT DR vehemently supported the orders of the Ld. PCIT and submits that AO has passed the assessment order without even mentioning or utter a single

SUNIL SRIVASTAVA,HALDWANI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3), HALDWANI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 10/DDN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Him From Time To Time

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 206CSection 44A

49,438/- ; F&O Loss was Rs 3,86,42,089/- resulting in net loss of Rs 47,81,382/-. On sale of shares, the assessee had earned short term capital gain at Rs 1,59,183/- and long term capital gain of Rs 12,61,857/-, which has been claimed as exempt

BG EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DDIT/ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ) CIRCLE-1, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7/DDN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Dec 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Raoassessment Years: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 44C

49. The ld. Counsel at the outset submitted that this issue has been considered by this Tribunal in assessment year 2010-11 as under: “41. We have carefully considered the rival contention and also noted the facts that BGIL has acquired and developed certain IT infrastructure and software for the benefit of BG Group of companies. Such assets include production

NARENDER KUMAR JAIN,RISHIKESH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(4)(1), RISHIKESH

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 35/DDN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun29 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Juneja, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 249

gains. Due to his ignorance, the assessee could not decipher the financial impact of such this allowance. The assessee was completely not aware of the fact that such this allowance of the carry forward of the loss would disentitle Narendra Kumar Jain Vs. DY. CIT him in claiming the set off thereof in the subsequent assessment years. Hence

NARENDER KUMAR JAIN,RISHIKESH vs. THE INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(4)(1), RISHIKESH

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 36/DDN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun29 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Juneja, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 143Section 249

gains. Due to his ignorance, the assessee could not decipher the financial impact of such this allowance. The assessee was completely not aware of the fact that such this allowance of the carry forward of the loss would disentitle Narendra Kumar Jain Vs. DY. CIT him in claiming the set off thereof in the subsequent assessment years. Hence

NIRMAL SINGH,KASHIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 36/DDN/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 69A

1) dated 13.09.2021, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 3. Learned departmental representative vehemently argues during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities herein have rightly treated the assessee’s cash 2 Nirmal Singh deposits