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.

3 results for “section 68”+ Section 112Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai17Pune4Delhi3Bangalore3Jaipur2Indore2SC1

Key Topics

Section 10(38)4Section 54F3Exemption3Addition to Income3Section 143(3)2Long Term Capital Gains2Penny Stock2Disallowance2Natural Justice2

SANJEEV AGRAWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

ITA 1518/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

section 112A, inserted by Finance Act, 2018, w.e.f. 01.04.2019. 6.6. He further elucidated that assessee is a habitual investor having portfolio of investment in shares and has earned capital gain both in preceding and succeeding years. Ld. Counsel referred to the details of investment and capital gain in preceding and succeeding years which is extracted below

SANJEEV AGRAWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

ITA 1519/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain & Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

section 112A, inserted by Finance Act, 2018, w.e.f. 01.04.2019. 6.6. He further elucidated that assessee is a habitual investor having portfolio of investment in shares and has earned capital gain both in preceding and succeeding years. Ld. Counsel referred to the details of investment and capital gain in preceding and succeeding years which is extracted below

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA vs. AJAY GOEL, HARYANA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1459/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Kanchan Kaushal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 54F

112A, wherein it\nwas held that a fractional ownership was not sufficient for claiming even fraction\ndepreciation Under Section 32 of the Act. Because of this judgment, the legislature had\nto amend the provisions of Section 32 with effect from 1 4 1997 by using the\nexpression "owned wholly or partly". So, the word "own" would not include