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.

77 results for “capital gains”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai832Delhi651Jaipur276Chennai238Ahmedabad221Hyderabad192Bangalore179Chandigarh128Kolkata115Cochin111Indore85Nagpur77Pune60Surat57Visakhapatnam54Amritsar39Rajkot34Lucknow34Panaji30Raipur27Guwahati25Cuttack19Jodhpur14Agra13Jabalpur11Patna9Dehradun9Ranchi6Varanasi6Allahabad3

Key Topics

Section 143(3)91Section 153A87Section 153C85Addition to Income58Section 6840Section 26323Section 14819Section 143(2)15Section 13213Unexplained Cash Credit

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

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

Showing 1–20 of 77 · Page 1 of 4

8
Disallowance7
Survey u/s 133A7
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 526/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

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

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

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

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

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 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 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

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

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

SHRI JAGDISH SUBHARAM CHITADE vs. A.C.I.T CIR.-3, NAGPUR

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 483/NAG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.483/Nag/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jagdish Subharam Chitade, The Assistant H.No.36, Godhani Bokhara, Dist. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Nagpur. Tax, Circle-3, Nagpur. Pan: Asppc 6752 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri G.J.Ninawe – Dr Date Of Hearing 15/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10/01/2023 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-2, Nagpur’S Dated 09.05.2016 In Case No.Cit(A)-2/111/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 54BSection 54F

Capital Gain. 2) The A.O. without any justification or valid reason has not taken value of the land at Rs. 2,22,453/- as valued by Appellant, rather illegally referred to Valuation Officer and valued the same at Rs. 12,649/-. The addition on this count deserves to be deleted. 3) The learned A.O. ought to have seen that deposit

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH CHAMPALAL MALVIYA, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 389/NAG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 147

gaining his confidence, Shri Deven Malviya, asked him to open an account in the assessee's name. Being a teacher in a Government Schools and as a Government employee he was unable to do so. But since Deven Malviya had shown a very rosy picture to the assessee, he fell under his influence and, therefore, on his suggestion, the appellant

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL COAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal being ITA no

ITA 23/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40Section 43B

capital gain of Rs.17.33.880/- on sale of shares claimed exempt u/s.10(38). 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of legal and professional charges of Rs. 2,25,310/-. 8. On the facts

A,C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.- 2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI DHARAMPAL R.AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal being ITA no

ITA 292/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40Section 43B

capital gain of Rs.17.33.880/- on sale of shares claimed exempt u/s.10(38). 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of legal and professional charges of Rs. 2,25,310/-. 8. On the facts