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”+ House Propertyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,114Delhi885Jaipur319Bangalore277Chennai269Hyderabad234Ahmedabad171Pune161Chandigarh148Kolkata136Cochin123Indore106Raipur71Nagpur59Surat49Visakhapatnam41Rajkot37Patna36Lucknow33Guwahati24Agra21Cuttack19Amritsar19Dehradun12Jabalpur10Jodhpur10Allahabad9Ranchi7Panaji2Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 54F10Section 2639Deduction6Section 143(3)5House Property5Section 224Capital Gains4Section 243Section 543Section 147

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1(1), JABALPUR vs. SHRI DEEPAK SINGH BANAFER, JABALPUR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms

ITA 92/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur11 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Sh. L.L. Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Shiv Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 54B

housing society. A contract of sale, as any other, presupposes and arises only on the meeting of minds, so that both the seller and buyer are clear and in agreement qua the nature of the land sold, which may in view of the vast price difference between a land being bought for agricultural purposes vis-a-vis for real estate

3
Addition to Income3
Section 254(2)2

SMT. VANDANA SARAOGI,KATNI vs. PCIT(CENTRAL) BHOPAL AT JABA, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 86/JAB/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur12 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.2016-17 Smt Vandana Saraogi Vs. Principal Commissioner Prop. Mahalaxmi Industries, Ghantaghar, Of Income Tax (Central) Hanumanganj Ward, Katni-483222. Bhopal At Jabalpur Director General Of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, 48, Arera Hills, Bhopal-462011. Pan: Asips2301L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.12.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pcit(Central), Bhopal At Jabalpur U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, For Short) Setting Aside The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 153A Read With Section 143(3) Of The Act Dated 22.04.2021. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 263(1)

capital gain in the assessment year 2016-17 against the sale of two properties and had not shown the correct sale consideration against the sale of property named, “House

MAHESHWARI MUKUND DAS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2), JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 27/JAB/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur19 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalemaheshwarimukunddas, Vs. Ito, Ward -2 1288, D B Vallbh Das Jabalpur Palace, Hanumantal, 2Nd Floor, Anxe Bldg, Jabalpur-482002, Aayakar Bhavan, Madhya Pradesh. Napier Town, Jabalpur-482001. Madhya Pradesh.

For Appellant: Shri.SapanUsrethe.Adv.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 54F

capital gain on the cost of building of remaining 8 properties as he has not done construction and appellant has sold land only which was also mentioned in the sale deeds itself. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal) was not justified in accepting the discount of 25% on encroached MaheswariMukund Das, Jabalpur. properties whereas discount should be more

ANUPAMA STHAPAK,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3), JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 25/JAB/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur19 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

capital gain account 6 Copy of ledger of purchase of plot and house construction along with purchase deed of plot 7 Copy of reply filed on 27.12.2018 along with electricity bill, payment receipt of property

KAILASH CHAND AGRAWAL,SATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, , SATNA

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 47/JAB/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2013-14 Kailash Chand Agrawal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 51, Pili Building Company Bag, Ward-1, Satna. Satna Pan : Ajlpa 3500B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Dhiraj Ghai, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Mehrotra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/07/2023

property reported in AIR, large cash deposit”. Thereafter, the assessment was completed at an income of Rs.49,67,801/- after making an addition of Rs.7,51,520/- on account of capital gains and further addition of Rs.24,00,771/- on account of undisclosed investment in house

GAURAV SINGH,SATNA vs. ITO-WARD SATNA, SATNA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 90/JAB/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Sept 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant& Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalegaurav Singh, Ito, C/0,Rajiv Narayan Singh, Aayakar Bhawan, Parijat Niwas, Civil Lines, Satna-485001. Satna-485001. Madhya Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Appellant Respondent Pan: Bbdps8879Q

For Appellant: Shri.Sapan Usrethe,Advocate. ARFor Respondent: Shri. Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 90Section 91

house property, income from capital gains, income from other sources and also receives salary from foreign country Maynmar. The assessee

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, SATNA, SATNA vs. SHRI PAWAN AGRAWAL, SATNA

In the result, both the appeals by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 41/JAB/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Pawan Agarwal, Naya Tax, Circle- Satna Talab Road, Satna Pan:Acjpa5377R (Appellant) (Respondent) & A.Y. 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Pankaj Agarwal, Naya Tax, Circle- Satna Talab Road, Satna Pan:Afhpa9553J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Sanjay Nema Adv & Sh. Ashish Goyal, Adv Revenue By: Sh. N.M. Prasad, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. The Above Captioned Appeals By Revenue Are Taken Up Together For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity & These Appeals Are Hereby Disposed Off Through This Consolidated Order; Because, In These Appeals The Tax Effect Is Less Than The Monetary Limit Fixed By The Central Board Of Direct Taxes (“Cbdt”, For Short) In Its Circular No. 09/2024 Dated 17.09.2024. Grounds Taken In These Appeals Of Revenue Are As Under: A.Y 2015-16 Sh. Pawan Agarwal Sh. Pankaj Agarwal

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Nema Adv & Sh. Ashish Goyal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR
Section 22Section 24Section 254(2)Section 54F

house property" as per the provisions of section 22 of the IT Act, duly enjoying the benefit of deduction provided U/s. 24 of the Act. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) erred in directing allowance of deduction of Rs. 1,88,57,399/- under sec. 54F of the IT Act against

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, SATNA, SATNA vs. SHRI PANKAJ AGRAWAL, SATNA

In the result, both the appeals by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 43/JAB/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
Section 22Section 24Section 254(2)Section 54F

house property\" as per the provisions of\nsection 22 of the IT Act, duly enjoying the benefit of deduction provided U/s.\n24 of the Act.\n2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) erred in\ndirecting allowance of deduction of Rs. 1,88,57,399/- under sec. 54F of the IT\nAct against

SHRI JASBIR SINGH MARWAH,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3) JABALPUR, JABALPUR

ITA 18/JAB/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur14 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshri Jasbir Singh Vs. Ito, Ward 2(3), Marwah, Aayakar Bhawan, 1040 Prem Nagar, Annexe Bldg, Madan Mahal, Nagrath Chowk, Jabalpur-482003 Jabalpur -482001. Madhyapradesh. Madhyapradesh. Pan/Gir No. : Ahipm6658H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rahul Bardia, Fca Respondent By : Shri Saad Kidwai, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 22.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.11.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Cit(A) Passed The Order U/Sec 143(3) R.W.S 263 & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assewssee Has Raised The Fallowing Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CIT DR
Section 44A

capital gain of Rs 80,77,061/-. (3) The Ld CIT (A) erred in supporting the order of Ld AO in valuing the property as on 01.04.1981 for Rs 29,746 instead of Rs 1,29,220/-. (4) The Ld CIT(A) erred in supporting the order of Ld AO in considering the constructed area of property

SHRI. NARSINGH RANGA,JABALPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

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

ITA 10/JAB/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur11 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Narsingh Ranga Dcit, Circle-2(1) V. Sharda Chowk, Nagpur Road, Aaykar Bhawan, Napier Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh- Town, Jabalpur, Madhya 482001. Pradesh-482001. Pan:Acmpr1917P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sanjay Seth, Ca Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 21 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11 06 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Seth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 54Section 54F

property. For the year under consideration AO has only to verify that the amount o investment which is to be deposited under section 54 as been invested with bank under long term capital gain scheme or not. That as per the provisions of section 54 of the act only says that the assessee should construct the house