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.

400 results for “capital gains”+ Section 50Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai677Delhi400Hyderabad204Ahmedabad201Chennai197Jaipur196Kolkata144Pune132Bangalore106Indore103Surat101Visakhapatnam57Nagpur50Rajkot41Agra37Chandigarh30Lucknow28Raipur24Dehradun19Jodhpur17Patna16Jabalpur15Amritsar13Ranchi10Cochin9Karnataka8Allahabad6Cuttack5Panaji3Varanasi3Calcutta2Telangana2Guwahati2SC1

Key Topics

Section 50C103Addition to Income68Section 143(3)42Section 14840Section 14739Section 153A38Section 5435Section 26326Deduction22Section 143(1)

MONI KUMAR SUBBA,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3982/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs. Sh. Moni Kumar Subba, Central Circle-4, New Delhi Subba Farm House, 118, Village Sultanpur, Mehrauli, Gurgaon Road, Delhi Pan :Aasps1484J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri. Moni Kumar Subba, Vs. Acit, Subba Farm House, 118, Central Circle-4, E-2, Ara Village Sultanpur, Mehrauli, Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., Gurgaon Road, Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aasps1484J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(47)Section 23Section 23(1)

capital gain arising from transfer of leasing rights of the land located at Silliguri and Darjeeling. The Ld. CIT(A) held the leasing of the land as in the nature of ‘transfer’ in terms of provisions of section 2(47) of the Act and treated the prevailing market value of the property ( deemed consideration under section 50C

Showing 1–20 of 400 · Page 1 of 20

...
19
Capital Gains18
Long Term Capital Gains18

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. MONI KUMAR SUBBA, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4038/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Vs. Sh. Moni Kumar Subba, Central Circle-4, New Delhi Subba Farm House, 118, Village Sultanpur, Mehrauli, Gurgaon Road, Delhi Pan :Aasps1484J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri. Moni Kumar Subba, Vs. Acit, Subba Farm House, 118, Central Circle-4, E-2, Ara Village Sultanpur, Mehrauli, Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., Gurgaon Road, Delhi New Delhi Pan :Aasps1484J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(47)Section 23Section 23(1)

capital gain arising from transfer of leasing rights of the land located at Silliguri and Darjeeling. The Ld. CIT(A) held the leasing of the land as in the nature of ‘transfer’ in terms of provisions of section 2(47) of the Act and treated the prevailing market value of the property ( deemed consideration under section 50C

SMT. ANITA MIGLANI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2235/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(1)(a)

gains and the same does not extend to the charging section or the exemptions to the charging section. The legislature consciously intended to apply the fiction under Section 50C only to the expression used in section 48 and not in any other place. Section 50C has no effect for calculating exemption u/s 54F. The long term capital

UMA DUTT PALIWAL PROP.,PANIPAT vs. ADDL. CIT, PANIPAT

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4626/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2008-09 Uma Dutt Paliwal, Vs Addl. Cit, Prop. Paliwal Home Furnishing, Karnal. Panipat. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Gurjeet Singh, Ca Respondent By: Shri O.P.Meena, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri O.P.Meena, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 50C

capital gains under Section 48. By the Explanatory notes to the amendment it was clarified that - Section 50C is a special

DHARA SINGH,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2213/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri T.S. Kapooray: 2012-13 Dhara Singh Ito, Ward 1(2), C/O Rupinder Kumar Vs. Ghaziabad Aggarwal, Uttar Pradesh Advocate, Ab-1A/22, Sector-51, Noida -201301 (Pan: Czjps0155A) (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv., ShFor Respondent: Sh. V.K. Jiwani, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234CSection 48Section 50CSection 54F

capital gains under Section 45 of the Act. From the aforesaid, it is apparently clear that the transfer of the property took place in the year 2001 when the provision of Section 50C

SUNIL MIGLANI,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5829/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamblesunil Miglani Vs Dcit Kj-2, Kavi Nagar Central Circle New Delhi Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(1)(a)Section 54F(1)(b)

gains and the same does not extend to the charging section or the exemptions to the charging section. The legislature 4 consciously intended to apply the fiction under Section 50C only to the expression used in section 48 and not in any other place. Section 50C has no effect for calculating exemption u/s 54F. The long term capital

PREM NATH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 1659/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Senior DR
Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 54Section 54E

gains mentioned in section 50C (1) are applicable to section 48 and not exemption provisions as mentioned in section 54 to section 54F. 5 ITA No.1659/Del./2013 3. Without prejudice to ground no.1 to 4 of the memo of appeal your appellant submits that lower authorities have erred in computing net taxable capital

NARENDRA KUMAR SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAQL CIRCLE-15, , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 12/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Narendra Kumar Singh, Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of C/O- Vivek Bansal, 2Nd Floor, Income Tax, B-3/4, Safdarjung Enclave, Central Circle-15, New Delhi New Delhi Pan :Akmps8087M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By S/Shri I.P. Bansal & Vivek Bansal, Advocates Respondent By Smt. Rinku Singh, Sr.Dr

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 50CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)(a)

section 50C of the Act, the sale consideration for the purpose of computing capital 3 gain, was to be taken

ANITA MIGLANI,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5828/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Vanshika Taneja, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 50CSection 54Section 54FSection 54F(1)(a)Section 54F(1)(b)

gains and the same does not extend to the charging section or the exemptions to the charging section. The legislature consciously intended to apply the fiction under Section 50C only to the expression used in section 48 and not in any other place. Section 50C has no effect for calculating exemption u/s 54F. The long term capital

SMT. RANJANA GARG,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the CO of the assessee is allowed and

ITA 2083/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaranjana Garg, Vs Dcit 141, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle 12, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Aanpg3625Q Extn., New Delhi. Ranjana Garg, Vs Dcit 141, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle 12, New Delhi. Jhandewalan Aanpg3625Q Extn., New Delhi. Acit Vs Amita Garg, Central Circle 12, G-15, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi. Aadpg0990L Acit Vs Amita Garg, Central Circle 12, G-15, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi. Aadpg0990L

Section 153A

capital gain in pursuance to section 2(47)(vi) and section 50C of the Act by considering the transfer of shares

GURBAKSHISH SINGH BATRA,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT - 12, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 396/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17 Gurbakshish Singh Batra, Vs Pr.Cit-12, E-1511, Wazir Nagr, New Delhi. Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi. Pan: Adspb2480J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Shashi Bhushan Sukla, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22Nd March, 2021 Of The Pcit, Delhi-12, Passed U/S 263 Of The It Act For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed His Return Of Income On 6Th October, 2016 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.44,86,160/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The It Act. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For ‘Limited Scrutiny’ Based On The Following Reasons:-

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shashi Bhushan Sukla, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 263Section 50C

Section 50C of the Act. The Assessing Officer has not made any disallowance u/s 50C of the Act. She further noted that the assessee got possession of land on 26.11.2015, the lease deed was registered on 21.01.2016 and sold the same on 16.02.2016. The period of holding was less than 36 months and, therefore, 2 the Capital Gain

NOIDA CYBER PARK PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 18(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 165/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Aggarwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms Banita M. Biswas C.I.T. DR
Section 115JSection 142Section 143(3)Section 50Section 50CSection 50C(2)

Section 50C of the Act be not invoked for the purpose of computation of Capital Gains. Notably, Section 50C(1) of the Act provides

ANALJIT SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(2), DELHI

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

ITA 4737/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Kant

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50D

50C of the Act was already on the statute prior to the former section being incorporated in the Act. If section 50D of the Act was sufficient to capture the situation as in the present case, then there was no necessity to insert provision of Section 50CA of the Act in the statute by the Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f

LALIT MOHAN GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 3678/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2009-10 Lalit Mohan Gupta Vs. Ito, Ward 20(4), D-125, Mahendru New Delhi Enclave, Delhi – 110009 (Pan: Ahtpg3030A) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. RS Singhvi, CA & ShFor Respondent: Sh. A. Sreenivasa Rao, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 54B

Section 50C of the I.T. Act, the value adopted by the stamp valuation authority shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received as a result of such transfer he accepted the claim of deduction u/s. 54B but made the addition of Rs. 27,16,668/- on account of capital gain

SHRI BALAJI INDUSTRIES COMPLEX,BADAUN vs. CIT, MORADABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2775/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2009-10 Balaji Industries Complex, Cit, Ismailpur, Moradabad-244001 Vs Badaun. (Pan: Abefs3007Q) Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Mr. Abhinav Mehrotra, Adv. Department By: Smt. Meeta Singh C.I.T. Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.09.2018

For Appellant: Mr. Abhinav Mehrotra, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Meeta Singh C.I.T. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 48Section 50C

Gains on Sale of BUILDING as per provisions of Section 50C, when the same constitutes DEPRICIABLE ASSETS and forms part of BLOCK of ASSETS, hence provision of Section 50C has no application, thereto. 6.2 Because Without Prejudice the learned Pr. CIT Moradabad, grossly erred in Law in directing the AO to calculate Capital

BETTER OPTION ESTATES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 948/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Chary

section 50C for the purpose of computation of capital gains. Assessee disputed the proposal made by the Ld. AO basing

MANOJ MITTAL,DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4596/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. C.S.Anand, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 2(22)(e)Section 50Section 50CSection 69

capital gains (section 50C), business profits (section 43CA) and other sources (section 56) arising out of transactions in immovable property

ANURAG TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(1), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2626/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita No. 2626/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Anurag Tyagi, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O R B Tyagi, Flat No. 303, Ward-1(1), Super Tech, Avant Grade Plot Ghaziabad No. 1, Sector-5, Vaishali, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagpt6848P Assessee By : Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. & Sh. Sanjay Prasar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Surendra Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.09.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.01.2018 Of Ld. Cit(A), Ghaziabad.

For Appellant: Sh. Anup Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Surendra Pal, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 54Section 54F

section 54 of I.T. Act itself, but also skipped the written submission dated 24/11/2016, 28/11/2016, dealing extensively the factual- legal aspects, presented before him during the course of assessment proceedings, without his own comments on the issues raised therein is reproduced herein below: A. The computation of long term capital gain u/s 50C

CK INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-6(1), DELHI

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

ITA 677/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 56(2)(vii)

capital gain in terms with\nsub-section (3) of section 50C. Therefore, sub-section\n(1) to section 50C cannot

YOGESH JUNEJA,FARIDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-29(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 218/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usi.T.A. No. 218/Del/2020 (A.Y 2015-16)

Section 143(3)Section 154

Section 50C, in case of transfer of a capital asset being land or building on both, the value adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority for the purpose of payment of stamp duty shall be taken as the full value of consideration for the purposes of computation of capital gains