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.

98 results for “capital gains”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,522Delhi1,365Chennai570Jaipur442Bangalore397Ahmedabad392Kolkata339Hyderabad281Chandigarh200Cochin180Indore159Pune147Nagpur98Surat98Visakhapatnam91Karnataka73Rajkot67Amritsar63Raipur42Calcutta41Cuttack39Lucknow39Panaji35Guwahati29Agra27Jodhpur23Telangana19Jabalpur15Dehradun12SC12Patna10Ranchi9Varanasi8Allahabad5Orissa4Rajasthan4Kerala1Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)108Section 153A87Section 153C85Addition to Income67Section 26358Section 6848Section 14820Section 143(2)19Section 25017Long Term Capital Gains

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

ITA 525/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Aryan GroverFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

deposited in respondent's bank account. In view thereof, the CIT[A] found there was no reason to add the capital gains as unexplained cash

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

ITA 526/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Showing 1–20 of 98 · Page 1 of 5

9
Unexplained Cash Credit9
Capital Gains8
For Appellant: Shri Aryan Grover
For Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

deposited in respondent's bank account. In view thereof, the CIT[A] found there was no reason to add the capital gains as unexplained cash

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

ITA 524/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Aryan GroverFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

deposited in respondent's bank account. In view thereof, the CIT[A] found there was no reason to add the capital gains as unexplained cash

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 411/NAG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

capital gain and to avoid paying taxes and have also been forwarded the details of transactions entered into by the assessee. The learned assessing officer has not any provided the details forwarded by Investigation Wing, Kolkatta as well as statement of persons, whose statement were recorded during the course of investigation made by the Pr. Director of Income Tax (Investigation

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

ITA 410/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

capital gain and to avoid paying taxes and have also been forwarded the details of transactions entered into by the assessee. The learned assessing officer has not any provided the details forwarded by Investigation Wing, Kolkatta as well as statement of persons, whose statement were recorded during the course of investigation made by the Pr. Director of Income Tax (Investigation

RAMKRUSHNA ZILBAJI THAKRE ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WRAD -4(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 207/NAG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 Jul 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Dr. Milind Bhusare, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 68

cash deposit is correctly taxed us 68 of the Act. However while doing so the CIT (A) accepted the contention of the petitioner that he is agriculturist, and other than that there are no sources of income while confirming the action of AO to tax it as income from other sources under S.68 of the Act . 17. . A perusal

VASANT CO-OP SHETKARI GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY LTD.,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 29/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 29/Nag/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Vasant Co-Op. Shetkari Ginning & Pressing Factory Limited; At. Yavatmal Road, Wani, Tq. Wani, Dist. Yavatmal-440 010 Pan : Aaaat1439M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pravin Gandhi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pravin Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal Bhosale, DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54G

deposited by him before furnishing such return, i.e, not later than the ‘due date’ applicable in its case for furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of Sec. 139 in a bank account maintained under the Capital Gain Account Scheme, 1988 (CGAS) with a specified bank, and the same shall thereafter within the specified time period be utilized

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. SHIKHA INDRAKUMAR AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 239/NAG/2023[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

deposited in respondent's bank account. In 13 view thereof, the CIT[A] found there was no reason to add the capital gains as unexplained cash

DCIT-CC-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. INDRAKUMAR GHISULAL AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 220/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

deposited in respondent's bank account. In view thereof, the CIT[A] found there was no reason to add the capital gains as unexplained cash

SHRIRAM NARAYAN TIKDE,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX, WARD 4(4) , NAGPUR

ITA 89/NAG/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234BSection 50C(2)Section 54Section 68

deposits are fully explainable from the cash withdrawals made during the year, opening cash balance available, income earned during the year and hence, addition made of Rs.13,00,000 u/s 68 is unwarranted, unjustified and bad in law. 8. The learned AO and learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the facts emanating from the documentary evidences filed

FATTESING PUNAJI DHABRE,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX – 2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 368/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Fattesing Punaji Dhabre Pcit – 2, Nagpur Plot No. 132, Chandan Nagar, Post Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Hanuman Nagar, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440001. Maharashtra – 440009. [Pan: Bacpd6505Q] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Madhav Vichare, Ca Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 263Section 54B

capital gain with computation and deduction / exemption with supporting evidence as well as justification of cash deposit of `. 6,00,000/–, copy

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI SANJAY GAURISHANKAR AGRAWAL , NAGPUR

ITA 109/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

deposited into the back account of the Assessee. 14. The learned Counsel further submitted that the Assessing Officer on mere assumptions, surmises and conjectures treated the amount received from sale of shares as unexplained cash credit treating the long term capital 9 Shri Sanjay Gaurishankar Agrawal ITA no.109/Nag./2019 gains

MISS FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

ITA 69/NAG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 69

cash deposit and Rs.1,00,000/- out of cheque deposit as Unexplained Income. Learned C.I.T.(A) has confirm the said addition without any basis. 6] Learned A.O. erred in adding amounting to Rs.34,740/- on estimated income as Commission Income from arranging Haj Tours. Learned C.I.T.(A) confirm the said addition without any basis. Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain

MISS FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

ITA 68/NAG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 69

cash deposit and Rs.1,00,000/- out of cheque deposit as Unexplained Income. Learned C.I.T.(A) has confirm the said addition without any basis. 6] Learned A.O. erred in adding amounting to Rs.34,740/- on estimated income as Commission Income from arranging Haj Tours. Learned C.I.T.(A) confirm the said addition without any basis. Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain

M/S. FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

ITA 66/NAG/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 69

cash deposit and Rs.1,00,000/- out of cheque deposit as Unexplained Income. Learned C.I.T.(A) has confirm the said addition without any basis. 6] Learned A.O. erred in adding amounting to Rs.34,740/- on estimated income as Commission Income from arranging Haj Tours. Learned C.I.T.(A) confirm the said addition without any basis. Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain

M/S. FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

ITA 64/NAG/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 69

cash deposit and Rs.1,00,000/- out of cheque deposit as Unexplained Income. Learned C.I.T.(A) has confirm the said addition without any basis. 6] Learned A.O. erred in adding amounting to Rs.34,740/- on estimated income as Commission Income from arranging Haj Tours. Learned C.I.T.(A) confirm the said addition without any basis. Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain

M/S. FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

ITA 65/NAG/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 69

cash deposit and Rs.1,00,000/- out of cheque deposit as Unexplained Income. Learned C.I.T.(A) has confirm the said addition without any basis. 6] Learned A.O. erred in adding amounting to Rs.34,740/- on estimated income as Commission Income from arranging Haj Tours. Learned C.I.T.(A) confirm the said addition without any basis. Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain

M/S. FATEMA SHOEB HUSSAIN,,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(4),, NAGPUR

ITA 67/NAG/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 69

cash deposit and Rs.1,00,000/- out of cheque deposit as Unexplained Income. Learned C.I.T.(A) has confirm the said addition without any basis. 6] Learned A.O. erred in adding amounting to Rs.34,740/- on estimated income as Commission Income from arranging Haj Tours. Learned C.I.T.(A) confirm the said addition without any basis. Smt. Fatema Shoeb Hussain

MINAKSHI SATISH NIMODIA,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 233/NAG/2024[AY 2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Milind Bhusari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 69ASection 80C

deposited cash of Rs.10 lakhs on 30.03.2010 in the Indian Overseas Bank, Ramnagar, Nagpur and cheque was also issued on the same date for purchase of part- payment of flat. He, therefore, called for explanation of the assessee. The assessee, in response thereto, filed her cash flow statement, certain confirmation letter from parties wherefrom assessee allegedly received back the advanced

RAVINDRA MADANLAL KHANDELWAL,AKOLA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE , AKOLA

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

ITA 375/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 144BSection 68

deposited same to the credit of the ex-chequer. Duly complying with the law, the assessee had also filed TDS returns. The TDS returns were also submitted before the AO. We are hereby again attaching herewith all TDS returns for the relevant year annexure 3. f) Purpose for which loan was taken:- The Loans were taken for the purpose