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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 163clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai386Delhi327Chennai167Surat148Karnataka113Bangalore104Jaipur86Ahmedabad73Hyderabad70Chandigarh69Agra68Kolkata63Indore55Cochin51Raipur33Pune26Lucknow23Nagpur22Visakhapatnam20Calcutta20Guwahati14Telangana10Varanasi8SC8Dehradun6Rajkot6Patna5Allahabad5Amritsar5Jabalpur4Rajasthan3Ranchi3Jodhpur2Panaji2Andhra Pradesh1Cuttack1

Key Topics

Section 2638Section 263(2)4Limitation/Time-bar4Revision u/s 2634

SURESH UPADHYAY AND SONS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

ITA 21/JAB/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra , CIT-DR
Section 263Section 263(2)

163 (SC)). The issue, however, is the date on which the impugned order/s in the instant case/s stands issued, a matter of fact. Toward this, while the assessee relies on the date of dispatch, the Revenue does on the date of the order, and on which it was signed or, at worst, apparently so. The onus of proving that

SMT. ANURADHA UPADHYAY,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

ITA 22/JAB/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra , CIT-DR
Section 263Section 263(2)

163 (SC)). The issue, however, is the date on which the impugned order/s in the instant case/s stands issued, a matter of fact. Toward this, while the assessee relies on the date of dispatch, the Revenue does on the date of the order, and on which it was signed or, at worst, apparently so. The onus of proving that

SURESH UPADHYAY AND SONS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

ITA 20/JAB/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra , CIT-DR
Section 263Section 263(2)

163 (SC)). The issue, however, is the date on which the impugned order/s in the instant case/s stands issued, a matter of fact. Toward this, while the assessee relies on the date of dispatch, the Revenue does on the date of the order, and on which it was signed or, at worst, apparently so. The onus of proving that

SURESH UPADHYAY AND SONS,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),

In the result, the appeals by the assessee‟s are dismissed

ITA 19/JAB/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra , CIT-DR
Section 263Section 263(2)

163 (SC)). The issue, however, is the date on which the impugned order/s in the instant case/s stands issued, a matter of fact. Toward this, while the assessee relies on the date of dispatch, the Revenue does on the date of the order, and on which it was signed or, at worst, apparently so. The onus of proving that