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.

9 results for “capital gains”+ Section 144Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai61Bangalore19Mumbai18Kolkata11Pune10Lucknow9Nagpur9Jaipur9Raipur8Delhi7Chandigarh3Cuttack3Surat3Hyderabad2Indore1Ahmedabad1Amritsar1Cochin1Dehradun1Agra1Panaji1Patna1

Key Topics

Addition to Income7Section 143(3)4Disallowance3Section 112Section 234A2Section 2502Section 1472Section 143(2)2Section 115B2Charitable Trust

DEPUTY COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. M/S. MAN PRAKSH TALKIES PVT. LTD, JAIPUR

ITA 406/JPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos.406 & 407/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-02, Jaipur cuke Vs. M/s Man Prakash Talkies Pvt Ltd. Near Yadgar, M. I. Road, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCM 6231 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@C.O. Nos.11 & 12/JP/2018 (Arising out of ITA Nos.406 & 407/JP/2018) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT) &
Section 147

Section 45(2) of the IT Act are applicable and the income ought to be taxed as Business Income and not a Capital Gains?” 9. The brief fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee is a private limited company. The assessee company was engaged in the business of exhibiting films in the cinema hall known

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. M/S MAN PRAKASH TALKIES PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

2
Exemption2
Condonation of Delay2
ITA 407/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos.406 & 407/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-02, Jaipur cuke Vs. M/s Man Prakash Talkies Pvt Ltd. Near Yadgar, M. I. Road, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCM 6231 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@C.O. Nos.11 & 12/JP/2018 (Arising out of ITA Nos.406 & 407/JP/2018) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT) &
Section 147

Section 45(2) of the IT Act are applicable and the income ought to be taxed as Business Income and not a Capital Gains?” 9. The brief fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee is a private limited company. The assessee company was engaged in the business of exhibiting films in the cinema hall known

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. UNIMAX BUILDESTATE PVT LTD, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as cross objection of the\nassessee are dismissed

ITA 103/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 May 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 250

capital gain is irrelevant. During the\nassessment proceedings, the assessee has submitted that the assessee has entered\ninto purchase transaction in the year under consideration. On the date of hearing\nfixed on 02.12.2016, the assessee furnished all the details, however, during the\nhearing itself the AO raised the issue of Purchase of property and gave the show\ncause notice

MUJMMEEL ,KOTA vs. ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE , KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 620/JPR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Miss. Swatika Jha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT a
Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69Section 69A

capital gains tax, along with any associated documentation, resides solely with the seller and is a matter strictly between the seller and tax authorities. The broker is neither involved in the financial decisions of the seller nor privy to their unique financial situations or tax returns. Thus, there can be no expectation that the broker would maintain detailed or accurate

SUCHITA BHATIA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIR-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 902/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Bhargav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Anup Singh, Addl.CIT a
Section 143(2)Section 250

144A of the Act may be invoked in suitable cases. g) Circular No. F.No.225/162/2016/ITA.II dated11-7-2016: CBDT with the approval of Revenue Secretary decided that there will be three type of notices i.e. 1) Limited Scrutiny, 2) Complete Scrutiny and 3) Manual scrutiny and provided the formats of the notices. It was also urged that henceforth notices will

MOHAN LAL ASHOK KUMAR SARAF,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 879/JPR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Nov 2024AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri Ankit Totuka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

144A of the IT Act itself appears to be an afterthought. Instead of giving attention to the show cause notice and participating in the adjudication, the petitioner appears to have been ill-advised to venture out in filing the above application. 53. Further, the cash was not found under the control and the possession of the said Mr.S. Srinivasan

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 666/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 234A

144A stands disposed off and stated to file submission before AO if any. Another opportunity was provided vide this office letter dated 21.09.2021. Requesting therein to file reply by 24.09.2021. However, on this date also no reply was filed. Therefore, another opportunity was provided wide office notice dated 24.09.2021 requesting therein to submit reply by 27.09.2021. However, on this date

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 665/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2013-14 Jodhpur Development Authority 1, Opposite Railway Hospital, JDA Circle, Jodhpur. cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jodhpur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAALJ 0478 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by:

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 234A

144A stands disposed off and stated to file submission before AO if any. Another opportunity was provided vide this office letter dated 21.09.2021. Requesting therein to file reply by 24.09.2021. However, on this date also no reply was filed. Therefore, another opportunity was provided wide office notice dated 24.09.2021 requesting therein to submit reply by 27.09.2021. However, on this date

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

ITA 116/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 153A

capital gain of Rs.\n252000/- on said purchase and sale.\n2. That the Id CIT(A) is also wrong and has erred in law in confirming addition of Rs.\n1100000/- made by the Id AO to the income of the appellant on account of alleged\ncash payment for purchase of plot at Muhana Road, Jaipur referred to in ground