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.

168 results for “capital gains”+ Section 254(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,219Delhi651Surat286Bangalore281Chennai237Ahmedabad192Jaipur168Kolkata149Karnataka123Cochin117Chandigarh99Hyderabad80Pune80Calcutta53Raipur50Indore46Nagpur20Lucknow19Rajkot17Guwahati16SC13Amritsar12Jabalpur11Cuttack10Panaji10Visakhapatnam10Varanasi9Telangana9Agra7Jodhpur6Kerala3Rajasthan2Punjab & Haryana2Ranchi1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Andhra Pradesh1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Addition to Income75Section 153A67Section 143(3)61Section 13256Search & Seizure32Section 6826Section 133A25Section 35A25Disallowance24

SMT. BIRMA DEVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated

ITA 678/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54B

capital gain scheme nor purchased the new asset not only till the date of filing return u/s 139(1) but even the extended date u/s 139(4). As per ld. AR, this case the Assessment Year involved is Assessment Year 2013-14, therefore time available for investing in the purchase of new asset was up to 31.03.2015. The assessee invested

Showing 1–20 of 168 · Page 1 of 9

...
Deduction24
Section 14819
Section 14718

SANJIV PRAKASHAN,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 9/JPR/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2024AY 2020-2021
For Appellant: Sh. Anil Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

254(2) of the Act\nstating that in the above order there was an apparent mistake on\nrecord as two grounds raised by the assessee before the Bench\nwere not decided. That ground was raised vide letter dated\n6/3/2023 before the Bench, filed on 09/03/2023, in which the\nassessee has raised following Additional Grounds of appeal

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

254, of the Income-\ntax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Capital assets (Agricultural land) - Assessment year 2013-\n14 - Assessee sold certain parcels of land and claimed that said land was agricultural\nland and, thus, capital gain arising from sale of said land was not chargeable to tax\nAssessing Officer held that land was capital asset on ground that land was held

MUNNI DEVI,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, JAIPUR

ITA 678/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT D/R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 54B

capital gain tax levied by\nA.O. on the sale of said agricultural land is wrong and unjustified.\nIn view of the above discussion and evidence furnished by the Id. A/R, we find no\njustification to sustain the addition. Thus the additions made by the AO and sustained\nby the Id. CIT (A) in respect of both the agricultural lands

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

254, read with section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appellate Tribunal – Order of – Assessment year 1984-85 – Assessee-company took over running business of a firm in which it was a partner – During relevant accounting period assessee received refund of sales-tax – ITO held that said refund was assessable as income of assessee – On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAMLAPRABHA L/H OF LATE SHRI GOPAL LAL JI GOSWAMI, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

ITA 94/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Aug 2025

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-Sr.DR a
Section 144Section 153C

Capital Gain of Rs.3,78,74,469/- (PB5). 2. In the first round, the case was selected for scrutiny supposedly, on the issue of examination of LTCG. Notices u/s 143(2) dt.18.09.2015 and thereafter notice u/s 142(1) were issued time to time which were duly replied and assessment was completed vide order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

ITA 1091/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT &
Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

254/- that was made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of amount of loans and advances to subsidiary/group companies. Disallowance of contribution to DAV Trust Management Society Department has also challenged deletion of addition of Rs. 82,10,270/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing contribution to DAV Trust Management Society. ITAT No. 1099/JPR/2024

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

ITA 1090/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT &
Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

254/- that was made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of amount of loans and advances to subsidiary/group companies. Disallowance of contribution to DAV Trust Management Society Department has also challenged deletion of addition of Rs. 82,10,270/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing contribution to DAV Trust Management Society. ITAT No. 1099/JPR/2024

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD., KOTA

ITA 1097/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT &
Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

254/- that was made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of amount of loans and advances to subsidiary/group companies. Disallowance of contribution to DAV Trust Management Society Department has also challenged deletion of addition of Rs. 82,10,270/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing contribution to DAV Trust Management Society. ITAT No. 1099/JPR/2024

HARISH SHARMA HUF,B-1, PATODIYA MARG, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-5(3), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 318/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Nov 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Chanchal Meena (JCIT)
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

254 (1) and Section 255 (6) of the Act clearly shows the power exercisable by the Tribunal and they are akin and equal to that of the power exercisable by the assessing authority and in the case on hand the tribunal ought to have exercised such power and or its failure renders the order as perverse. For the same proposition

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD., KOTA

ITA 1099/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT &
Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

254/- that was made by the Assessing Officer on account of\ndisallowance of amount of loans and advances to subsidiary/group\ncompanies.\nDisallowance of contribution to DAV Trust Management Society\nDepartment has also challenged deletion of addition of Rs.\n82,10,270/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing contribution to\nDAV Trust Management Society.\nITAT No. 1099/JPR/2024

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

ITA 1098/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Aug 2025AY 2015-16
Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

254/- that was made by the Assessing Officer on account of\ndisallowance of amount of loans and advances to subsidiary/group\ncompanies.\nDisallowance of contribution to DAV Trust Management Society\nDepartment has also challenged deletion of addition of Rs.\n82,10,270/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing contribution to\nDAV Trust Management Society.\nITAT No. 1099/JPR/2024

RAJRANI SINGHAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

ITA 1124/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

section 45(1) of Income Tax\nAct' 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a\nCAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the\nhead \"CAPITAL GAIN\".\nWhereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE”\nas “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O.\nduring assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154 even sale deed

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 500/JPR/2023[215-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 496/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Dilip B Desai(C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Alka Gautam (CIT) (V.H) &
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144B(1)(xvi)Section 80Section 80I

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

GANPATLAL AGARWAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

ITA 1127/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

section 45(1) of Income Tax\nAct' 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a\nCAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the\nhead \"CAPITAL GAIN\".\nWhereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE”\nas “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O.\nduring assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154 even sale deed

VINODKUMAR AGARWAL,AJMER vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

ITA 254/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 May 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (V.H.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153A

section 45(1) of Income Tax Act\n1961 states \"Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a\nCAPITAL ASSET\" shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the head\n\"CAPITAL GAIN\".\nWhereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered \"SALE VALUE\" as\n\"CAPITAL GAIN\", whereas complete details were filed to A.O. during\nassessment proceedings/u/sec. 154 even sale

GANPATLAL AGARWAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

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

ITA 1128/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT) a
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

section 45(1) of Income Tax Act’ 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a CAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the head “CAPITAL GAIN”. Whereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE” as “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O. during assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154 even sale deed

GANPATLAL AGARWAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

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

ITA 1125/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT) a
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

section 45(1) of Income Tax Act’ 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a CAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the head “CAPITAL GAIN”. Whereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE” as “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O. during assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154 even sale deed

RAJRANI SINGHAL,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

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

ITA 1122/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Porwal (C.A.) (Th. V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT) a
Section 10Section 127Section 132Section 153A

section 45(1) of Income Tax Act’ 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a CAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the head “CAPITAL GAIN”. Whereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE” as “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O. during assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154 even sale deed