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.

8 results for “capital gains”+ Section 271Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai18Jaipur16Delhi15Hyderabad14Ahmedabad11Kolkata8Pune8Chennai7Rajkot5Surat5Lucknow5Cochin5Indore4Bangalore2SC2Dehradun1Jodhpur1Patna1Visakhapatnam1Raipur1

Key Topics

Section 271A51Section 44A17Section 271(1)(c)13Section 143(3)12Section 271B10Penalty8Section 1326Section 10(38)5Section 275(1)(c)4Capital Gains

SARIKA DUGAR,KOLKATA vs. ITO, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 363/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Chirag Desai, Office staff on behalf of Miraj D. Shah, A/RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. D/R
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275Section 275(1)(c)

capital gain in the reopening proceedings. I.T.A. No. 363/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sarika Dugar 3 6.1. On the other hand, the ld. D/R submitted that the order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is not barred by limitation as on account of Covid- 19 Pandemic, the limitation period was extended from time to time by the CBDT. Copies

3
Short Term Capital Gains3
Search & Seizure3

I.T.O., WARD-8(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. JALAN INTERCONTINENTAL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1623/KOL/2014[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2017AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1623/Kol/2014

For Appellant: Shri R.P.Nag, Addl. CIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None (AR)
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271BSection 44ASection 56(2)

Capital Gains’. The business income of the assessee, which is assessable under the head ‘Income from Business’ was interest of Rs. 66,370/-, and commission and brokerage of Rs. 224/- . Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) observed that these business receipts ( that is, Rs. 66,370/- and Rs. 224/-), are much less than monetary limit of Rs. 40 Lakhs, therefore

SHRI PANKAJ JALAN,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1923/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1923/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Pankaj Jalan -Vs- Dcit, Cc-4(2), Kolkata [Pan: Actpj 8249 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. Satnaliwala, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 271A

capital gains and (iv) income from other sources. The ld AO had assessed the following income under the head ‘income from other sources’ of the assessee in the assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 17.4.2014 :- (a) Dividend - Rs 62,810/- (claimed as exempt) (b) Interest on tax free bond – Rs 26,165/- (calimed as exempt) (c ) Interest

MR. BHAGAWATI PRASAD JALAN,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1924/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1924/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Bhagwati Prasad Jalan -Vs- Dcit, Cc-4(2), Kolkata [Pan: Acopj 3259 N] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. Satnaliwala, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 271A

capital gains and (iv) income from other sources. The ld AO had assessed the following income under the head ‘income from other sources’ of the assessee in the assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 17.4.2014 :- (a) Dividend - Rs 59,926/- (claimed as exempt) (b) Interest on tax free bond – Rs 26,165/- (calimed as exempt) (c ) Interest

NIRAJ JALAN,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1925/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1925/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Niraj Jalan -Vs- Dcit, Cc-4(2), Kolkata [Pan: Acxpj 5139 N] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. Satnaliwala, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 271A

capital gains , income from house property and income from other sources. In the penalty order, the ld AO notes that during the course of post search operation, the assessee admitted an undisclosed income of Rs. 1,25,23,000/- for the Asst Year under consideration in the form of commodity profit vide disclosure petition 2 Niraj Jalan A.Yr

SWETA CHIRIMAR,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 29(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 619/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm &Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am]

Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 275Section 275(1)(c)Section 68

Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of shares of Rs.6,70,139/- as exempt u/s. 10(38) of the Act which was withdrawn during the course of assessment proceedings and consequently, the sale consideration of the shares of Rs.7,20,139/- was treated as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act in the assessment framed

CHANDRA KANTA FALOR,DURGAPUR vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 280/KOL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. No. 280/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Chandra Kanta Falor.................................................................................................................Appellant A-36, Armstrong Apartment, Sector – 2A, Bidhannagar, Durgapur – 713212. [Pan: Ajpf 7591 E] Vs Acit, Circle – 1, Durgapur..................………………………………………...............................Respondent Appearances By: Shri Arvind Agarwal, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Ranu Biswas, Acit, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue: Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 02, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 16, 2022 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Respondent: Date of concluding the hearing : February 02, 2022
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 44A

capital gain has been accepted by u/s 44AB of the Act. The transaction is covered u/s 45 of the Act and is not liable to be covered u/s 28 of the Act. The assessee calculated the turnover on the basis of guidance of Institution of Chartered Accountant of India. So far as the transaction on non-delivery basis is concerned

SHRI DIYA SHANKAR NATHANI,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O, WARD-29(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1955/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ] I.T.A No. 1955/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: S.Jhajharia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Niloy Baran Som, JCIT,Sr.DR
Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

271B of the Act. The appellate proceedings were decided ex-parte by CIT(A) and he confirmed the action of AO. The prayer of the learned counsel for the assessee before us was that the turnover of the assessee was in fact not more than Rs.40 lakhs and the provision of section 44AB of the Act were not applicable