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.

10 results for “capital gains”+ Section 156clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai281Delhi232Ahmedabad80Chennai76Bangalore71Cochin58Jaipur47Hyderabad45Panaji38Kolkata36Raipur34Pune22Chandigarh21Surat18Nagpur17Lucknow12Indore10Rajkot9Cuttack8Visakhapatnam7Dehradun5Agra5Ranchi4Amritsar4Jabalpur2Patna1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 12A9Section 143(3)6Section 1445Section 1475Section 143(1)5Addition to Income5Section 1484Section 12A(1)(ac)4Section 80I3

DCIT-1(1), BHOPAL vs. SHRI PRAKASH BHOJWANI, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 172/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Cit, Shri Prakash Bhojwani, 1(1), H.No. 7, Parika Phase-I, Bhopal Walmi Road, बनाम/ Chuna Bhatti, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue / Respondent) (Assessee / Appellant) Pan: Abvpb 8825 E Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.01.2024

Section 111ASection 111USection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 28

section 43(5). The remaining transactions have resulted in short term capital gain. Therefore, the AO’s action in treating the entire short term capital of Rs. 57,28,867/- as business income was incorrect, unjustified and arbitrary. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 7,52,383/- only pertaining to the intraday sale

Business Income3
Long Term Capital Gains2
Disallowance2

HARISH KUMAR CHANDNANI,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed

ITA 107/IND/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013
Section 144Section 147Section 148

capital gain'. The above transaction is 'adventure in the nature of trade' and profit\narising out of above transaction is chargeable as 'business profit' of the assessee-society.\n10.4 As discussed in preceding paras, since the impugned sale transaction is 'adventure\nin the nature of trade', the contention of the assessee-society that the impugned lands are\n'rural agricultural

LATE SHRI BALKRISHAN JOSHI (THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SHRI BHOOPENDRA JOSHI),INDORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed partly

ITA 402/IND/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2008-09 Late Shri Balkrishan Joshi Income-Tax Officer, (Through L/H Shri 5(1), Bhoopendra Joshi), Indore बनाम/ 541, Alok Nagar, Vs. Kanadia Road, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Abjpj 0180 C Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Shri Bavesh Agrawal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21.05.2024

Section 143(3)Section 253(5)

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3. This is the 2nd round of litigation by assessee before us. The background facts are such that the assessee filed return of income for AY 2008-09 on 31.07.2008 declaring a total income

SHRI MAYUR BANSAL,GWALIOR vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of the revenue in IT(SS)ANo

ITA 81/IND/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

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

Section 119Section 153ASection 156

capital gain." 2. "On the fact and in the Circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 34,00,000/- made by AO for A.Y. 2014-15 on account of undisclosed income of undisclosed investment." 3. "On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting

MAHESH KHANDELWAL,INDORE vs. ADDL JCIT (A) -1 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 330/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jul 2025AY 2010-11
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

CAPITAL GAINS\nपूंजीगत प्राप्तियां\n0\n0\n5\nINCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES\nअन्य सूत्रों से आय\n3,766\n3,766\n6\nINTRA HEAD ADJUSTMENTS\nNA\n0\n7\nGROSS TOTAL INCOME(AFTER\nINTRA HEAD ADJUSTMENTS) 1\n5,28,449\n7,98,449\n8\nLOSS OF CURRENT YEAR ADJUSTED\n0\n0\n9\nLOSS OF PREVIOUS YEARS\nADJUSTED\n0\n0\n10\nINCOME\nDETAILS\nGROSS

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 on sale of land as business income are not supported by any incriminating material found during the course of search and therefore, assessee succeeds on this legal ground and 16 Swadesh Developers the addition made for A.Y. 2008-09 to A.Y. 2012-13 are deleted and deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act claimed by the assessee

M/S. BRIDGESTONE INDIA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. THE ACIT NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 84/IND/2022[2017-18/]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanibridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. Acit (Nfac) Plot No.A-43, Phase-Ii, Delhi Midc Chakan, Village Vs. Sawardari, Taluka Khed, Pune (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcb 2304 E Assessee By Shri Sukhsagar Syal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 23.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 43(1)

Section 58 of the Income-tax Act for supplementary statement of facts on the ground that the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has not recorded essential facts on the point of object and purpose of giving subsidy to the respondent nor is any such finding of fact given. However, after hearing learned counsel, we see no valid ground to allow

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), INDORE, INDORE vs. DIVINE INFRACREATION AND TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly quash the assessment-order made by AO.\nThe assessee's ground is allowed

ITA 272/IND/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2025AY 2010-11
Section 144Section 148Section 68Section 68(1)

capital gains were clearly available before the\nAssessing Officer during the original assessment proceedings and that the\nRevenue had not brought any material before it, which was not disclosed by\nthe assessee in the original return of income. Thus, the Tribunal concluded\nthat there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any material\nfact relevant

SMT. KAVITA SACHDEV,INDORE vs. ITO-3(4), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 255/IND/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shrib.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Kavita Sachdev, Income-Tax Officer, 112,Jairampur Colony, 3(4), बनाम/ Indore. Indore. Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan : Arcps6793D Assessee By Shri Milind Wadhwani, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.05.2024

Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

capital gain interest and other sources. The AO also initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and levied a penalty equivalent to 100 % of the tax sought to be evaded, amounting to Rs. 2,10,000/-. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the Ld. CIT(A) and explained that the assessee paid self-assessment

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)

gains of business\nwhich is not incidental to\nthe attainment of its\nobjectives or separate\nbooks of account are not\nmaintained by such\ntrust or institution in\nrespect of the business\nwhich is incidental to the\nattainment of its\nobjectives; or\n(c) the trust or institution\nhas applied any part of\nits income from the\nproperty held under