Search: capital gains | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

489 results for “capital gains”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,028 Delhi1,718 Ahmedabad682 Jaipur489 Chennai483 Bangalore423 Kolkata379 Hyderabad306 Pune295 Surat228 Chandigarh198 Indore189 Karnataka129 Raipur94 Visakhapatnam94 Agra91 Nagpur73 Rajkot68 Cochin64 Lucknow63 Cuttack50 Amritsar40 Calcutta39 Ranchi29 Patna24 Dehradun22 SC19 Jodhpur17 Guwahati17 Telangana14 Allahabad8 Panaji7 Varanasi6 Jabalpur5 Punjab & Haryana3 Gauhati1 ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1 K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1 Orissa1 Rajasthan1 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)123 Section 271A93 Addition to Income69 Section 143(3)54 Penalty50 Section 14841 Section 153A34 Section 14732 Section 139(1)27 Search & Seizure

KIRAN YADAV,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 853/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri K.L. Moolchandani-ARFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR

capital gain at Rs. 17,24,767/- Is upheld. All the grounds raised in this appeal are dismissed. 5. With regard to initiation of penalty

BIRENDRA SINGH NIRBHAY,SIRSI ROAD JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ITO WARD 3(1) JAIPUR, NCRB INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT STATUE CIRCLE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 704/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Showing 1–20 of 489 · Page 1 of 25

...

27

Long Term Capital Gains21

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CA

For Respondent: Shri Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR

Section 10(38)Section 132(4)Section 69C

gain of ₹27,87,561/-was added to the assessee's\nincome from other sources and taxed at 30% under Section 115BBE.\nii.\niii. Additionally, it was determined that an 6% commission (₹1,85,530/-\ncalculated at a reasonable 6% rate on the sale) is to be treated as\nundisclosed expenditure under Section 69C.\niv. Separate penalty proceedings under Section

OMPRAKASH,DHOLPUR vs. ITO WARD 4 BHARATPUR, BHARATPUR

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes as indicated hereinabove\nOrder pronounced in the open court on\n17/01/2025

ITA 1255/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rahual Pandya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary (JCIT-DR)

Section 147Section 148oSection 2(14)Section 271(1)(C)Section 45

capital gain.\n3. That order of learned Assessing Authority is based on assumptions and presumptions and\nagainst real facts of the case.\n4. That learned Assessing Authority grossly erred in law and facts in making penalty

NIRMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1224/JPR/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Feb 2025AY 2013-2014

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

Capital Gain 15,72,409/- 58-62 Offered in IDS At this juncture, reliance is placed on decision of Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Killick Nixon Ltd., Mumbai vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, wherein it has been held as under: “As far as the provisions of KVSS are concerned, we agree with the contention

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 152/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

capital gain including the report of the SIT report he had relied upon. He has heavily relied on the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act wherein the assessee has accepted the amount as not genuine transactions and therefore, the same CO No. 15 & 16/JP2020 & others ACIT vs. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mantri may be viewed in accordance with

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 153/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

capital gain including the report of the SIT report he had relied upon. He has heavily relied on the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act wherein the assessee has accepted the amount as not genuine transactions and therefore, the same CO No. 15 & 16/JP2020 & others ACIT vs. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mantri may be viewed in accordance with

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SUNITA AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 156/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

capital gain including the report of the SIT report he had relied upon. He has heavily relied on the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act wherein the assessee has accepted the amount as not genuine transactions and therefore, the same CO No. 15 & 16/JP2020 & others ACIT vs. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mantri may be viewed in accordance with

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. ASHA JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 159/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

capital gain including the report of the SIT report he had relied upon. He has heavily relied on the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act wherein the assessee has accepted the amount as not genuine transactions and therefore, the same CO No. 15 & 16/JP2020 & others ACIT vs. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mantri may be viewed in accordance with

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SANGEETA MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 160/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

capital gain including the report of the SIT report he had relied upon. He has heavily relied on the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act wherein the assessee has accepted the amount as not genuine transactions and therefore, the same CO No. 15 & 16/JP2020 & others ACIT vs. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mantri may be viewed in accordance with

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 161/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

capital gain including the report of the SIT report he had relied upon. He has heavily relied on the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act wherein the assessee has accepted the amount as not genuine transactions and therefore, the same CO No. 15 & 16/JP2020 & others ACIT vs. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mantri may be viewed in accordance with

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 162/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

capital gain including the report of the SIT report he had relied upon. He has heavily relied on the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act wherein the assessee has accepted the amount as not genuine transactions and therefore, the same CO No. 15 & 16/JP2020 & others ACIT vs. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mantri may be viewed in accordance with

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 164/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

capital gain including the report of the SIT report he had relied upon. He has heavily relied on the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act wherein the assessee has accepted the amount as not genuine transactions and therefore, the same CO No. 15 & 16/JP2020 & others ACIT vs. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mantri may be viewed in accordance with

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 165/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

capital gain including the report of the SIT report he had relied upon. He has heavily relied on the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act wherein the assessee has accepted the amount as not genuine transactions and therefore, the same CO No. 15 & 16/JP2020 & others ACIT vs. Sh. Ramesh Kumar Mantri may be viewed in accordance with

CHANDRA PRAKASH JAIN,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 66/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar, Joint CIT, Ld

Section 10(38)Section 139(4)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 69C

Capital Gain and is being disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee treating the same as income from other sources. Since assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income separately it is a fit case for initiating penalty

SMT. RENU JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 5(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the sole ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 96/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Shah (C.A.)For Respondent: Miss Chanchal Meena (JCIT)

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 54F

capital gain from being charged to Income Tax on the sale of property used for residence up to March 30, 1998, inasmuch as the return of Income Tax for the assessment year 1997-98 could be furnished before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment whichever

BITTHAL DAS PARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1348/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Him. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

capital gain at Rs.6,19,338/- has been disclosed, Accordingly, the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was completed on 3 Sh. Bittal Das Parwal vs. ACIT 29.12.2017 and income was assessed at Rs.6.18,74,055/- by making the following additions and also penalty

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SUNITA AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 157/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

capital gain through various brokers on payment of commission. In some cases assessee routed unsecured loan in it's books through jamakharchi companies who's creditworthiness, identity and transactions are not genuine. The assessing officer has discussed the issues in great length in the assessment order. I hereby rely on the reasons mentioned an assessment order for such additions. Further

ACIT, CC-4, , JAIPUR vs. SHRI ANSHUL JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 163/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

capital gain through various brokers on payment of commission. In some cases assessee routed unsecured loan in it's books through jamakharchi companies who's creditworthiness, identity and transactions are not genuine. The assessing officer has discussed the issues in great length in the assessment order. I hereby rely on the reasons mentioned an assessment order for such additions. Further

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SUNITA AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 158/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

capital gain through various brokers on payment of commission. In some cases assessee routed unsecured loan in it's books through jamakharchi companies who's creditworthiness, identity and transactions are not genuine. The assessing officer has discussed the issues in great length in the assessment order. I hereby rely on the reasons mentioned an assessment order for such additions. Further

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 155/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

capital gain through various brokers on payment of commission. In some cases assessee routed unsecured loan in it's books through jamakharchi companies who's creditworthiness, identity and transactions are not genuine. The assessing officer has discussed the issues in great length in the assessment order. I hereby rely on the reasons mentioned an assessment order for such additions. Further