BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

40 results for “capital gains”+ Section 10(15)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,362Delhi1,808Chennai629Bangalore512Ahmedabad483Jaipur472Hyderabad457Kolkata311Chandigarh269Pune220Indore201Raipur143Cochin142Surat129Nagpur120Rajkot102Visakhapatnam87Lucknow72Amritsar70Panaji46Guwahati40Dehradun40Cuttack38Patna31Jodhpur22Ranchi18Agra18Allahabad14Jabalpur10Varanasi6

Key Topics

Section 153A48Section 153D25Addition to Income23Section 25022Section 143(3)18Section 14816Section 271(1)(c)12Section 13211Disallowance11

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. VINOD BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 66/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 51/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

Showing 1–20 of 40 · Page 1 of 2

Section 6810
Long Term Capital Gains7
Capital Gains6

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 52/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 53/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 54/GTY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 55/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA (HUF), DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 56/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. USHA BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 57/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. MEENAKSHI BAMALWA SONI, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 58/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. BHAGWATI DEVII BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 59/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. VISHAL BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 60/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. VINAY BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 61/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. RAVI BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 62/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. MADAN LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 63/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. SHEETAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 64/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. PRAMOD KUMAR BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 65/GTY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

15. The ld. Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the claim of the assessee is bogus and thereupon he assessed it. He denied the claim of exemption under section 10(38) and made additions in the respective hands of each assessee. 16. Dissatisfied with the additions made

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI vs. SHRI PANNALAL BHANSALI, GUWAHATI

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 428/GTY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati31 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Respondent: Shri P. S. Thuingaleng, ACIT
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

gain tax with proper disclosure in the concerned return of income for the year in which this transaction is claimed to have taken place. 8.6. We thus find that there are discrepancies and contradictions in the submission made by the assessee which, more importantly, has been for the first time furnished before the Ld. CIT(A). Findings arrived

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH, DIBRUGARH vs. SANTOSH BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 104/GTY/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati13 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 104/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Smt. Santosh Bamalwa Tax, Circle-1, Dibrugarh Vs Ground Floor Mahalaya Road C/O A.K. Varma Dibrugarh - 786001 [Pan: Aedpb9900P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) C.O. No. 34/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Santosh Bamalwa Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Dibrugarh Vs Ground Floor Mahalaya Road C/O A.K. Varma Dibrugarh - 786001 [Pan: Aedpb9900P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Arun Bhowmick, Jcit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/11/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross-Objection Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Central, North-East Region, Guwahati (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 14/07/2023, Passed U/S

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Bhowmick, JCIT, D/R
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

capital gain, the grounds are almost identical. This Tribunal vide its order dt. 01/09/2023 in ITA NO. 51 & 52/GAU/2023 & ors., has adjudicated the similar issues and dismissed the revenue’s appeal observing as follows:- “27. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Section 153A including the amendment effected by Finance Act, 2017 whereby

SUNITA CHOUDHURY,MAKUM ROAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TINSUKIA

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

ITA 136/GTY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Largely On Account Of The Fact That Even At That Stage The Assessee Did Not Respond To The Notices Issued From His Office.

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 68

Capital Gain which is exempt under section 10(38) of the Act as income assessable under the head 'Income from Other Sources' merely on surmises and conjectures. 14. For that the impugned order passed by the Id. CIT(A) without allowing any reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant and therefore, the same is bad in law. 15

PANKAJ KUMAR,KARNAL vs. CIT (APPEALS), DELHI

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

ITA 173/GTY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Daljit Singh, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Kausik Ray JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

15 .10.2025 ORDER PER MANOMOHAN DAS, JM The assessee filed this appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the (“CIT(A)” dated 22.05.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Page 1 of 5 ITA NO. 173 / GTY / 2025 Pankaj Kumar