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.

20 results for “capital gains”+ Section 120(4)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai348Delhi324Chennai104Chandigarh98Jaipur90Bangalore73Cochin68Hyderabad50Ahmedabad46Raipur43Pune42Kolkata38Indore20Visakhapatnam20Cuttack18Surat13Rajkot13Lucknow7Amritsar7Varanasi5Guwahati5Nagpur4Patna3Panaji3Dehradun2Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)23Section 12A23Section 6815Section 153A13Addition to Income13Section 1011Section 1329Disallowance9Section 10(38)6Section 143(2)

M/S TRUBA EDUCATION SOCIETY ,BHOPAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

ITA 801/IND/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Apr 2025AY 2023-24
Section 11Section 127(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)

120 of the Act. The registration can be\nwithdrawn/cancelled only by the 'Prescribed Authority' who has been\nempowered to grant the registration as held in several judicial\npronouncements including the judgement rendered by Jurisdictional Tribunal\nin case of Oriental University Indore (ITA Nos.115 & 116/Ind/2020) and case\nof Devi Shakuntala Thakaral Charitable Foundation, Bhopal (ITA Nos.\n117/Ind/2020).\n3.\nWRONG INTERPRETATION

6
Exemption5
Long Term Capital Gains3

M/S SHISHUKUNJ EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,THE SHISHUKUNJ INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, GRAM JHALARIA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX. AAYKAR BHAWAN,

ITA 806/IND/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Apr 2025AY 2024-25
For Appellant: Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Adv. with Gagan Tiwari, ArunFor Respondent: Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 127(2)Section 132Section 143(3)

120 of the\nAct. The registration can be cancelled only by the 'Prescribed Authority' who has been empowered\nto grant the registration as held in several judicial pronouncements including the judgement\nrendered by Jurisdictional Tribunal in case of Oriental University Indore (ITA Nos.115 &\n116/Ind/2020) and case of Devi Shakuntala Thakaral Charitable Foundation, Bhopal (ITA Nos.\n117/Ind/2020).\n3. WRONG INTERPRETATION

M/S SHREE JAIRAM EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. ACIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 548/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37

120 and this section, the word" case", in relation to any person whose name is specified in any order or direction issued thereunder, means all proceedings under this Act in respect of any year which may be pending on the date of such order or direction or which may have been completed on or before such date, and includes also

M/S SHREE JAIRAM EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 90/IND/2019[-]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2021

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37

120 and this section, the word" case", in relation to any person whose name is specified in any order or direction issued thereunder, means all proceedings under this Act in respect of any year which may be pending on the date of such order or direction or which may have been completed on or before such date, and includes also

SMT. SHEELA AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-5(5), INDORE

In the result, all three appeals of two assessee are allowed

ITA 215/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 68

b. Neither the Ld. AO nor the Ld. CIT(A) have established how their unilateral concocted theory of arranging bogus long term capital gain applies to the assessee by any tangible evidence. The addition made by the Ld. AO has been sustained only on the basis of theory of human probabilities without any concrete basis or live link/involvement of assessee

ANKUR AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE

In the result, all three appeals of two assessee are allowed

ITA 217/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 68

b. Neither the Ld. AO nor the Ld. CIT(A) have established how their unilateral concocted theory of arranging bogus long term capital gain applies to the assessee by any tangible evidence. The addition made by the Ld. AO has been sustained only on the basis of theory of human probabilities without any concrete basis or live link/involvement of assessee

SMT. SHEELA AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-5(5), INDORE

In the result, all three appeals of two assessee are allowed

ITA 216/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 68

b. Neither the Ld. AO nor the Ld. CIT(A) have established how their unilateral concocted theory of arranging bogus long term capital gain applies to the assessee by any tangible evidence. The addition made by the Ld. AO has been sustained only on the basis of theory of human probabilities without any concrete basis or live link/involvement of assessee

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 309/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Deshpande, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

capital gain under section 10(38) of the Act can be made in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. These submissions and case laws referred to by the assessee are reproduced by the ld.CIT(A) in his impugned order. The ld.CIT(A) after considering detailed submissions of the assessee and case laws cited

THE DCIT, 2(1), INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 244/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Deshpande, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

capital gain under section 10(38) of the Act can be made in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. These submissions and case laws referred to by the assessee are reproduced by the ld.CIT(A) in his impugned order. The ld.CIT(A) after considering detailed submissions of the assessee and case laws cited

JCIT(OSD),-2(1),INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI KESHAV KUMAR NACHANI, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 441/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Deshpande, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

capital gain under section 10(38) of the Act can be made in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. These submissions and case laws referred to by the assessee are reproduced by the ld.CIT(A) in his impugned order. The ld.CIT(A) after considering detailed submissions of the assessee and case laws cited

DEEPAK PAREKH,USA vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC, BENGALURU

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 126/IND/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Sept 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(1)

B, 12th Floor, Cedar Block, Greenage, Bangalore, so while filing the Income Tax Return for AX 2022-23 the sale of this apartment and the capital loss arising on this sale was offered in the hands of the assessee appellant i.e. Shri Deepak Parekh. It is on this pretext that the entire TDS deducted of Rs.29,18,240/- was claimed

THE ACIT CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL vs. SMT MEENAKSHI SARAIYA, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue and CO are dismissed

ITA 231/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit (Central)- Smt. Meenakshi Saraiya Bhopal E-13/111, Arera Colony Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan: Anrps3407K Revenue By Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Assessee By Shri Ila Parmar, Cit- Dr

Section 132Section 132(4)

120 of Indian Contract Act 1872. He has further submitted that this MOU gives the details of payment in future but no material was found during the search and no fact was detected even in the statements recorded during the search and seizure action as well as during the assessment proceedings that the alleged payments as mentioned

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S. MANISH AGRO TECH PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result grounds of revenue for A

ITA 219/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ruchira SinghalFor Respondent: Shri P.K Mishra, CIT (DR)

120 to 123/Kol/2018 vide its recent order dated 04.12.2020 22 had an occasion to deal with the identical case. The sole issue involved was the disallowance of loss incurred by the assessee in trading of commodities on the NMCE treating it to be bogus. In this case also survey u/s 133A was conducted on 18.12.2014 by the Investigation Wing Ahmedabad

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S. MANISH AGRO TECH PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result grounds of revenue for A

ITA 218/IND/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ruchira SinghalFor Respondent: Shri P.K Mishra, CIT (DR)

120 to 123/Kol/2018 vide its recent order dated 04.12.2020 22 had an occasion to deal with the identical case. The sole issue involved was the disallowance of loss incurred by the assessee in trading of commodities on the NMCE treating it to be bogus. In this case also survey u/s 133A was conducted on 18.12.2014 by the Investigation Wing Ahmedabad

THE ACIT,CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

ITA 235/IND/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Tulsian, CA &For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT, DR
Section 147

120 to CO Nos.2 to 4/Ind/2022 123/Kol/2018 vide order dated 04.12.2020 had an occasion to deal with the identical case. The sole issue involved was the disallowance of loss incurred by the assessee in trading of commodities on the NMCE treating it to be bogus. In this case also survey u/s 133 A of the Act was conducted

THE ACIT ,CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

ITA 226/IND/2021[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Tulsian, CA &For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT, DR
Section 147

120 to CO Nos.2 to 4/Ind/2022 123/Kol/2018 vide order dated 04.12.2020 had an occasion to deal with the identical case. The sole issue involved was the disallowance of loss incurred by the assessee in trading of commodities on the NMCE treating it to be bogus. In this case also survey u/s 133 A of the Act was conducted

THE ADDL. CIT RANGE -1, INDORE vs. M/S PRAKASH OILS LTD., DHAR

In the result, the above captioned appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the

ITA 227/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Tulsian, CA &For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT, DR
Section 147

120 to CO Nos.2 to 4/Ind/2022 123/Kol/2018 vide order dated 04.12.2020 had an occasion to deal with the identical case. The sole issue involved was the disallowance of loss incurred by the assessee in trading of commodities on the NMCE treating it to be bogus. In this case also survey u/s 133 A of the Act was conducted

M/S SWADESH DEVLOPERS AND BUILDERS,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2, BHOPAL

ITA 705/IND/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 44ASection 80I

Capital Gain at Rs. 1,82,94,410/- but the ld. AO was of the view that the assessee being engaged in the real estate business, such income from sale of land needs to be taxed as business income and accordingly treated the income of the assessee as business income and calculated tax accordingly. Income of the assessee

AMIT ASHOK AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-2(2), INDORE

In the result, the quantum appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and penalty appeal of assesse is allowed

ITA 210/IND/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 144Section 271A

4. On the other hand, Ld. DR has submitted that the assesse has not filed return of income and also not maintain books of account therefore, the explanation of the assesse cannot be verified from the record so far as the business income of the assessee as well as the utilization of the funds withdrawn from the banks

AMIT ASHOK AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-2(2), INDORE

In the result, the quantum appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and penalty appeal of assesse is allowed

ITA 209/IND/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Oct 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 144Section 271A

4. On the other hand, Ld. DR has submitted that the assesse has not filed return of income and also not maintain books of account therefore, the explanation of the assesse cannot be verified from the record so far as the business income of the assessee as well as the utilization of the funds withdrawn from the banks