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.

110 results for “reassessment”+ Short Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai907Delhi601Jaipur305Chennai294Bangalore278Ahmedabad260Kolkata160Pune127Hyderabad110Indore93Raipur85Chandigarh85Surat58Nagpur46Visakhapatnam39Guwahati32Lucknow31Rajkot20Karnataka18Cochin17Agra17Ranchi13Amritsar13Patna9SC7Telangana5Cuttack5Jabalpur4Jodhpur3Kerala3Dehradun2Panaji2Allahabad2Calcutta1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 148118Section 143(3)112Section 14793Section 153A86Addition to Income59Section 153C58Section 26353Search & Seizure44Section 13242

(LATE) AUDINARAYANA REDDY ALTHURI REP.BY L/R MAHESH REDDY ALTHURI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 39/HYD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA D K ChhablaniFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

short term capital gains to various beneficiaries. Further, during the course of investigation, it was noticed that, they have facilitated various entities to trade in shares of M/s. Twenty First Century India Limited and other penny scrips for providing accommodation entry of bogus long term/short term capital gains. Further, information received from the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata shows that

Showing 1–20 of 110 · Page 1 of 6

Capital Gains41
Long Term Capital Gains29
Section 143(2)28

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. RASA AGROTECH PVT.LTD., SEC'BAD, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeal as well as

ITA 730/HYD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 The Dy. Cit, Circle-3(1), Vs. M/S. Rasa Agrotech Pvt Hyderabad. Ltd, Secunderabad.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay GandhiFor Respondent: Smt. U. Minichandran
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50Section 50B

reassessment proceedings and also treating the long term capital gains offered by the assessee as short term capital gain. The assessee

GAJANAN FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 255/HYD/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana RaoFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai. (D.R.)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 70(3)

reassessment framed on 16.12.2011 disallowing/adding the short term capital gains of Rs.16,70,179 as not eligible to be set off against

SRUTHI RIEDL,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION-2, HYDERABAD

ITA 126/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Sruthi Riedl, Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad Vs. (International [Pan No. Aggpp6953R] Taxation)-2, Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Ar /Revenue By: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit-Dr राजस्‍वजस्‍व द्वारा सुनवाई ई की तारीखीख/Date Of Hearing: 28/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीखीख/Pronouncement On: 08/11/2023

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 2(47)

short term and long term capital gains and the case was processed. Thereafter, information was received from l&CI, Hyd that the assessee along with 46 other persons had entered into Joint Development Agreement cum General Power of attorney with M/s Trendset Jayabheri Projects LLP, Hyd for construction of residential and commercial project vide registered deed bearing no. 2357/2016

P.ASHOK KUMAR (HUF),TIRUPATI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE, TIRUPATI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 711/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Sri S.Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 54F

short term or long-term capital gains, ultimately the AO did not find any mistake in his original order thus accepted the income originally Page 10 of 11 ITA Nos 711 and 712 of 2018 P Ashok Kumar HUF Tirupati.. assessed. Since there was no escapement of income found by the AO, the reassessment

P.ASHOK KUMAR (HUF),TIRUPATHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE, TIRUPATHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 712/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Sri S.Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 54F

short term or long-term capital gains, ultimately the AO did not find any mistake in his original order thus accepted the income originally Page 10 of 11 ITA Nos 711 and 712 of 2018 P Ashok Kumar HUF Tirupati.. assessed. Since there was no escapement of income found by the AO, the reassessment

K GOPAL RAJ, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CEN.CIRCLE-1(3), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 773/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Esther N. Hangal
Section 132Section 143(3)

reassessment. 16. The learned CIT(A) having held that the transfer takes place only when the project is completed to tax the capital gains in the year of completion of project by adopting sale consideration at stamp duty value or actual consideration received whichever is high. 17. Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. K GOPAL RAJ, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 765/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Esther N. Hangal
Section 132Section 143(3)

reassessment. 16. The learned CIT(A) having held that the transfer takes place only when the project is completed to tax the capital gains in the year of completion of project by adopting sale consideration at stamp duty value or actual consideration received whichever is high. 17. Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time

ITO, WARD-7(3), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. KOSETTY KISHORE, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 342/HYD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Esther N. Hangal
Section 132Section 143(3)

reassessment. 16. The learned CIT(A) having held that the transfer takes place only when the project is completed to tax the capital gains in the year of completion of project by adopting sale consideration at stamp duty value or actual consideration received whichever is high. 17. Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time

ITO, WARD-7(3), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. KOSETTY NAGARAJU, HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 343/HYD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmans.No.

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Esther N. Hangal
Section 132Section 143(3)

reassessment. 16. The learned CIT(A) having held that the transfer takes place only when the project is completed to tax the capital gains in the year of completion of project by adopting sale consideration at stamp duty value or actual consideration received whichever is high. 17. Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time

THULASI CHAMARTHY,CHITTOOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, CHITTOOR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1374/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 54Section 54F

term capital gain on the sale of the subject property of Rs.81,62,440/-. 8. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without success. 9. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. 10. We have heard the Learned Authorized Representatives of both

CANARA SECURITIES LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2321/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11 Canara Securities Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hydereabad. Income-Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pan – Aaacc8283G Hyderabad. Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Ramkishore Jhawar Revenue By: Shri Nilanjan Dey Date Of Hearing: 08/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 03/07/2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ramkishore JhawarFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

short ‘the Act’) and there is no 143(3) assessment in this case. 2.1 Subsequently, the AO received specific information that the assessee had contrived losses by using Client Code 2 I.T.A. No. 2321Hyd/18 Canara Securities Ltd., Hyd. Modification (CCM) facility and based on the information, AO reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act. Accordingly, notice

SIVA SHANKER REDDY GANDLURU, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1686/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Apr 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 50C

short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both parties. Case files perused. 2. We notice from a perusal of the assessees’ pleading in the instant twin appeals that it has challenged validity of Section 148/147 proceedings on various facets followed by the issue on merits that the impugned long term capital gain’s addition of Rs.37,00,000/- each has been wrongly made

SIVAPOTHULURU VEERAREDDY GADLURU, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1685/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Apr 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Anil Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 2(14)Section 50C

short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both parties. Case files perused. 2. We notice from a perusal of the assessees’ pleading in the instant twin appeals that it has challenged validity of Section 148/147 proceedings on various facets followed by the issue on merits that the impugned long term capital gain’s addition of Rs.37,00,000/- each has been wrongly made

PREETI GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE - 9(1), I.T. TOWERS, HYDERABAD.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1174/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1174 & 1175/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Smt. Preeti Gupta Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 9(1) Pan: Abmpm7172Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Madhukar Aves, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/04/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 17/04/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Madhukar Aves, Sr. AR
Section 111ASection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151ASection 69A

reassessment has been initiated on incorrect and inappropriate facts, as the reasons recorded allege non- disclosure of share transactions despite the appellant having duly disclosed short term capital gains

PREETI GUPTA, HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE - 9(1), I.T. TOWERS, HYDERABAD.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1175/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1174 & 1175/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Smt. Preeti Gupta Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 9(1) Pan: Abmpm7172Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Madhukar Aves, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/04/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 17/04/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Madhukar Aves, Sr. AR
Section 111ASection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151ASection 69A

reassessment has been initiated on incorrect and inappropriate facts, as the reasons recorded allege non- disclosure of share transactions despite the appellant having duly disclosed short term capital gains

S HARINATH CHOWDARY ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 719/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 May 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Sh. Nilanjan Dey, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 50C

short term capital gain by considering Rs.70 lakhs as sale consideration for sale of 5 flats. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) who confirmed the order of the AO by accepting the sale consideration at Rs.38,56,040/- as against Rs.70 lakhs taken by the AO. For this purpose, the CIT(A) considered the SRO value

RAJU SURYANARAYANA ALLURI,USA vs. ITO (INT TAXN)-1, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 505/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Balakrishna, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)(v)Section 45

reassessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Act. In response to the notice u/s.148 of the Act, the assessee filed his ROI on 24.03.2023 declaring total income of Rs.1,89,600/-. After going through the submission of the assessee, the Ld. AO contended that the transfer of property take place in the year of JDA and the assessee is liable for capital

ACIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD vs. NARENDRA KUMAR KAMARAJU, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 338/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.338/Hyd/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Sri Narendra Kumar Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Kamaraju, Hyderabad. 3-83/1/A/5, Nizampet, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. Pan: Aiypk 1035 F (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Ca Ravi Bharadwaj ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Kumar Pranav, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA Ravi BharadwajFor Respondent: Sri Kumar Pranav, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

short term capital gain from the said transaction ie., Rs. 30 lacs on Ac. 22.27 gts in the tax return filed for the AY 2020-21.  The Ld. CIT(A) in the order has clearly stated that the capital gains on the transfer of above land admeasuring Ac. 10.00 gts shall not arise as the assessee is not the owner

D. HARI PRASAD, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-11(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 823/HYD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2008-09 Mr. D. Hari Prasad, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 4-1-103/9, Flat No.503, Ward-11(2), Sai Prasanna Towers, Hyderabad. Bhavani Nagar, Nacharam, Hyderabad. Pan: Aefpd 6589 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri Y. Ratnakar Revenue By: Sri Nilanjan Dey, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.01.2019 Order Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.:

For Appellant: Sri Y. RatnakarFor Respondent: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

reassessment proceedings, the A.O. noticed that the assessee, along with another individual i.e., Sri R.V.K. Varma, had sold a house property bearing Municipal No.8-2-293/82/L/28/A/2 on plot No.28/A/2 admeasuring 600 square yards located in Survey No.403/1 of Shaikpet Village and Survey No.101/1 of Hakimpet Village of Sri Venkateswara Cooperative Housing Building Society at Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad for a total