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.

3 results for “capital gains”+ Section 74clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,944Delhi1,605Bangalore708Ahmedabad488Chennai448Jaipur335Kolkata332Hyderabad245Surat231Pune192Chandigarh192Indore154Karnataka142Raipur133Cochin127Visakhapatnam60Calcutta59Cuttack53Rajkot51Nagpur48Panaji44Guwahati36Lucknow29Amritsar27Telangana24SC17Ranchi13Jodhpur11Agra10Varanasi8Dehradun8Patna4Rajasthan4Allahabad4Jabalpur3Kerala2K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)6Section 2635Section 271(1)(c)5Section 43C2Section 1152

AMBIKA CHARAN DIXIT,JABALPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 37/JAB/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur24 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43C

Capital gain with respect to sale consideration (higher or AIR and ITR). 3. The assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 14/08/2013 by determining the total income of Rs.8,74,550/- by making addition of Rs.2,56,280/- and Rs.50,000/- u/s 43CA and disallowed the expenses respectively. The learned Pr. CIT is of the opinion that

SHRI UMA PRAKASH SINGH vs. ITO,

ITA 65/JAB/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Jan 2020AY 2005-06

Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Sanjay Aroraassessment Year: 2005-06 Uma Prakash Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Vill. & Po Chorhata – Ward 1, Rewa Rewa (M.P.) [Pan: Aopps 0999R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Bench:
Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) dated 11.9.2008 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2005-06. 2. None appeared for and on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called out for hearing, nor is there any adjournment application on record. The instant appeal is outstanding for disposal since 06.8.2012, having come

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR vs. MADHYA PRADESH POWER GENERATING CO. LTD., JABALPUR

In the result, the Revenue's appeal is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 251/JAB/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur23 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Halder, DR
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

74,31,814/- however rejected expenses of Rs.2,38,29,432/- which is not correct. After considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the AO is not justified in levying penalty of Rs.71,48,830/- as all the information has been reflected in the audit report and the appellant has not concealed