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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 273Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Surat10Visakhapatnam9Hyderabad8Bangalore8Chennai8Ahmedabad4Jaipur4Mumbai3Delhi3Kolkata1Indore1Rajkot1Cuttack1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 271B7Section 269S6Section 271D4Section 271F4Penalty3Section 1472Section 273B2House Property2

MANPHOOL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 748/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: The Appeal Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. Dev Arora (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 271B

gain to business income. The bench noted that the revenue could not controvert the fact that the assessee submitted that this is only solitary transactions which cannot be termed as business income. Merely the assessee has not challenged the finding of the ld. CIT(A) in quantum in the penalty proceeding the assessee cannot be called upon pay the penalty

KANHAIYA LAL LALWANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-5(1) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 364/JPR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.P. Chawla, ITPFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT

capital gain arose on the sale of immovable property could have been below taxable limit. It is noteworthy to mention that the provisions of Section 273B

SH. ASHOK KUMAR PORWAL,JHALAWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 572/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 269SSection 271D

capital gain (LTCG) on sale of shares which was claimed as exempt under section 10(38), since said transactions of sale and purchase of shares were admitted by assessee and it had not brought on record anything to suggest that reassessment proceedings were being undertaken in arbitrary manner, impugned reopening notice was justified [2023] 152 taxmann.com

SAKKU DEVI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 88/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT) a
Section 139(1)Section 271FSection 273BSection 274

section. This being the position, the case gets covered u/s 273B of the Act. Reliance on the Judgment/Order of "Arjun Dada KharateVs DCIT (ITAT Pune)2020" 10. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned appellate authority erred in passing the Appellate order dt.31.12.2022 by stating that that penalty proceeding u/s 271F