Search: capital gains | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

193 results for “capital gains”+ Section 50C(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai265 Delhi193 Jaipur111 Hyderabad78 Chennai78 Ahmedabad73 Kolkata58 Indore57 Surat51 Pune43 Nagpur39 Bangalore38 Visakhapatnam29 Lucknow27 Agra24 Rajkot21 Chandigarh21 Dehradun17 Raipur16 Patna15 Jodhpur10 Jabalpur7 Cochin6 Amritsar6 Panaji3 Allahabad3 Cuttack2 Varanasi2 Ranchi1 Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 50C75 Addition to Income62 Section 153A42 Section 143(3)38 Section 14737 Section 14833 Section 153D19 Section 143(1)18 Section 26317 Capital Gains

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

Showing 1–20 of 193 · Page 1 of 10

...

17

Long Term Capital Gains16

SHANKAR DAYAL HUF,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-30(7), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2200/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Singhavi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ram Dhan Meena, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 251(1)(a)Section 50CSection 54E

capital gain in terms with sub-section (3) of section 50C. Therefore, sub-section (1) to section 50C cannot be 8 Shankar

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

1) and sub-sections (6) and (7) of section 23A sub- section (5) of section 24, section 34 A A. section 35 and section 37 of the Wealth-tax, Act, 1967 (27 of 1957) shall, with necessary modifications, apply in relation to such reference as they apply in “12. As far as the first question is concerned, this Court notices

INDER JEET MALIK ,DELHI vs. ADIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-71(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 1024/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 10ASection 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 50CSection 50C(1)

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

SUDESH SACHDEV ,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 15, DELHI

In the result appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 188/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyasstt. Year : 2019-20 Sudesh Sachdev, Vs. Dcit, 147, Ground Floor, Central Circle- 15 Lodhi Road Jorbagh, Delhi. New Delhi 100 003 Pan Ablps5027M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pratap GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 50CSection 50C(1)Section 50C(2)

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

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 is merely on the basis of surmises & conjectures and not sustainable under law. 4 That order u/s 263 is not sustainable on facts and under the law as the same is not erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of revenue.” 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly challenged the order of the PCIT in invoking her revisional

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. MAHAVEER TRANSMISSION LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2844/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 153Section 153ASection 153D

Capital Gains. Thus, the ground no. 1 of appeal of the assessee is allowed and corresponding ground no 2. Of the department is dismissed.”  ITO, Ward-15 (1), Hyderabad Vs. Smt. Vankayalapati Kiranmayee And (Vice-Versa) 2022 (1) TMI 294 - ITAT Hyderabad Dated: - 6-1- 2022 “9. In this regard, we refer to Section 50C

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2633/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 153Section 153ASection 153D

Capital Gains. Thus, the ground no. 1 of appeal of the assessee is allowed and corresponding ground no 2. Of the department is dismissed.”  ITO, Ward-15 (1), Hyderabad Vs. Smt. Vankayalapati Kiranmayee And (Vice-Versa) 2022 (1) TMI 294 - ITAT Hyderabad Dated: - 6-1- 2022 “9. In this regard, we refer to Section 50C

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2634/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 153Section 153ASection 153D

Capital Gains. Thus, the ground no. 1 of appeal of the assessee is allowed and corresponding ground no 2. Of the department is dismissed.”  ITO, Ward-15 (1), Hyderabad Vs. Smt. Vankayalapati Kiranmayee And (Vice-Versa) 2022 (1) TMI 294 - ITAT Hyderabad Dated: - 6-1- 2022 “9. In this regard, we refer to Section 50C

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSIN LTD ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25 , NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2635/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 153Section 153ASection 153D

Capital Gains. Thus, the ground no. 1 of appeal of the assessee is allowed and corresponding ground no 2. Of the department is dismissed.”  ITO, Ward-15 (1), Hyderabad Vs. Smt. Vankayalapati Kiranmayee And (Vice-Versa) 2022 (1) TMI 294 - ITAT Hyderabad Dated: - 6-1- 2022 “9. In this regard, we refer to Section 50C

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. MAHAVEER TRANSMISSION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2845/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 153Section 153ASection 153D

Capital Gains. Thus, the ground no. 1 of appeal of the assessee is allowed and corresponding ground no 2. Of the department is dismissed.”  ITO, Ward-15 (1), Hyderabad Vs. Smt. Vankayalapati Kiranmayee And (Vice-Versa) 2022 (1) TMI 294 - ITAT Hyderabad Dated: - 6-1- 2022 “9. In this regard, we refer to Section 50C

MAHAVIR TRANSMISSION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2632/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 153Section 153ASection 153D

Capital Gains. Thus, the ground no. 1 of appeal of the assessee is allowed and corresponding ground no 2. Of the department is dismissed.”  ITO, Ward-15 (1), Hyderabad Vs. Smt. Vankayalapati Kiranmayee And (Vice-Versa) 2022 (1) TMI 294 - ITAT Hyderabad Dated: - 6-1- 2022 “9. In this regard, we refer to Section 50C

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI vs. MAHAVEER TRANSMISSION LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the all appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2846/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Subhra J. Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Section 153Section 153ASection 153D

Capital Gains. Thus, the ground no. 1 of appeal of the assessee is allowed and corresponding ground no 2. Of the department is dismissed.”  ITO, Ward-15 (1), Hyderabad Vs. Smt. Vankayalapati Kiranmayee And (Vice-Versa) 2022 (1) TMI 294 - ITAT Hyderabad Dated: - 6-1- 2022 “9. In this regard, we refer to Section 50C

DCIT, CIRCLE - 19(1), NEW DELHI vs. RAPID ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3522/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandrathe Dy. C.I.T Vs. Rapid Engineering Co. Pvt Ltd Circle – 19(1) 111-112, Dsidc Sheds Delhi Okhla Phase – 1, New Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 50(1)Section 50C(1)Section 56(2)(x)

Section 50C(1) was thus relaxed, and very thoughtfully so, to take these bonafide cases of small variations between the stated sale consideration vis-à-vis stamp duty valuation, out of the scope of adjustments contemplated in the computation of capital gains

BHAGVAT SINGH,KHURJA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3), BULANDSHAHR

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1239/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmabhagvat Singh, Vs. Ito, C/O. Jai Kisha, Adv, 86, Ward-1(3), Nai Basti, Khurja, Aligarh Bulandshahr (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Dbwps8579E

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 2(14)Section 50C

section 50C . Therefore, the AO is being directed to re-compute the LTCG after taking full value of consideration.” 4. The assessee is now in appeal raising following grounds of appeal:- “(1) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 1,09,69,234/- made towards the long term capital gain

ANUBHAV KAPOOR,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2364/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 50C(2)Section 54Section 54(2)Section 54B

1,01,55,000/- 1961 Net Long Term Capital Gain Rs. 4,88,868/- 3.2. The AO noted that the assessee while calculating the LTCG had not adopted the sale consideration of the property as per section 50C

SHIVDEEEP TYAGI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO,WARD-2(3), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 484/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 50C

1) of the act opens with: "Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), where the capital gain arises from the transfer by way of compulsory acquisition under any law of a capital asset, being land or building or any right in land or building, forming part of an industrial undertaking…..". Thus, it is palpable from section

MONI KUMAR SUBBA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-08, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3794/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usshri Moni Kumar Subba Vs. Acit 118, Subba Farm House, Central Circle – 08, Vill. Sultanpur, Mehrauli New Delhi Gurgaon Road Delhi – 110 030 Pan No. Aasps 1484 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri R. S. Singhvi, C.A. Shri Satyajeet Goel, C.A. Shri Rajat Garg, C.A. Revenue By Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 05.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.09.2024 Order Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Am :

Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(47)Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 50C

50C of the Act and directed re-computation of quantum of capital gains. The ITAT in the second appellate proceedings restored the stance of the AO on the quantum of capital gains liable for taxation. On challenge by the assessee, the order of the Tribunal, in turn, has been admitted for adjudication and substantial question of law has been framed

AKASH GARG,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE INT. TAX 1(3)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 313/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadi.T.A No.313/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Akash Garg Dcit 4/71, Road No.71, Vs. Circle Int. Tax Punjabi Bagh West, 1(3)(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Aldpg7446A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 48Section 50C

50C. (1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed or assessable by any 2 ITA.No.313/Del/2023 authority of a State Government (hereinafter in this section referred to as the “stamp valuation authority

SHAILENDRA ,MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD- 2(3), MEERUT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6100/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2009-10] Shailendra, Vs Ito, C/O-Vinod Kumar Goel, 282, Ward-2(3), Boundary Road, Civil Lines, Meerut. Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Cavps9753D Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Ms. Maimun Alam, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 02.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.02.2023

Section 144Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

section 50C cannot be apply to determine concealed particulars of income. The A.O. is therefore, directed to workout the concealed capital gain in accordance with the sale value of the property shown on the sale deed and on that basis as well as using the cost of acquisition allowed in appeal. On this actual amount of concealed capital gains