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.

8 results for “capital gains”+ Section 144Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai295Delhi126Ahmedabad91Hyderabad68Pune64Jaipur64Bangalore60Chennai58Chandigarh43Kolkata35Surat30Visakhapatnam27Raipur26Rajkot21Agra18Indore18Cochin14Lucknow12Nagpur8Jabalpur8Patna6Dehradun6Panaji4Ranchi3Jodhpur2Cuttack1Guwahati1Amritsar1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 26314Section 14710Section 1487Section 143(3)6Addition to Income6Section 56(2)(x)4Section 2504Section 44A4Section 80C4House Property

SUSHILA BHAURAO DESHMUKH,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 76/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: ShriK.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 54BSection 54E

capital gain and deductions claimed u/s 80C; xi) Reply to ITO, Ward–2, Amravati dated 20/09/2018; xii) Copy of bank statements and working sheet to explain payment of cost of improvement; xiii) Copy of sample bills & ledger account; 7 SushilaBhauraoDeshmukh ITAno.76/Nag./2022 xiv) Notice for hearing dated 16/02/2022; xv) Assessment order u/s 143(3) r/w section 263 r/w section 144B

2
Deduction2

SIMA RAVISINGH KACHHAWAH,UMRER vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

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

ITA 418/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadalesima Ravisingh Kachhawah, Girad Road, Om Nagar Umrer, ……………. Appellant Nagpur- 441203 Maharastra, Pan – Aqmpk2899K V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(4), Nagpur Assessee By: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.Ar Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.ARFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 270A(9)Section 272(1)(d)Section 44ASection 50CSection 80C

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 15.03.2023, without due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, and in raising an arbitrary and excessive demand of Rs. 9,76,265/-, rendering the assessment order unjustified, unwarranted, and bad in law. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) NFAC has erred

NIRMALKUMAR AGRAWAL HUF,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHANDARA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Loya a/wFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

capital gain and income from other sources. The Finance Intelligence Unit (FIU) had credible information which indicated that Navdurga Advisory Private Limited (NAPL) was a shell company and consequent 3 Nirmalkumar Agrawal (HUF) ITA no.242/Nag./2025 transactions with this company were suspicious or sham entries. It was also conveyed that high value transactions were undertaken by the assessee with NAPL

VIRAMBHAI HARGOVANBHAI PATEL,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 421/NAG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Bhavesh MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 56(2)(x)

144B of the Income Tax Act passed is illegal, invalid and bad in law; 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in confirming total addition of Rs.3,56,100/- made by the assessing officer, therefore order passed is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive; Virambhai Hargovanbhai Patel

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

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned First Appellate Authority was justified in endorsing the addition made under section 68 of Rs.5,20,84,000/-. Specifically in the light of the facts

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. VINODKUMAR RAJENDRALAL KOCHHAR, KAMPTEE

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

ITA 386/NAG/2023[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Jul 2024

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44A

Gains and Income from other sources & he had been regularly filing his return of income for the last 5 decades. (iii) During the captioned assessment year, the appellant had opted for computation of income U/s. 44AD in respect of his business activity and while filing online return of Income u/s. 139(1) for AY 2016-17, PART A-BS- Balance

MAYURA NILESH LATI,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 96/NAG/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Jun 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhrymayura Nilesh Lati, Ito, Ward-4(4), Nagpur B-01, Padmanabh Residency, Plot No.16/B, Tilaknagar, Vs. Nawabarea Layout, Near Whc Road, Dharampeth, Nagpur. Pan: Aevpl 2151 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yash Varma, Ld. CA throughFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 49(1)

capital gain of the Assessee’s share at Rs. 37,87,667 being 1/3rd and accordingly framed assessment u/sec. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. 6. The Assessee, being aggrieved, preferred first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner. The Ld. Commissioner held that since the property was inherited by the Assessee, cost of acquisition by the previous owners should have been

PRAKASH SHESHRAO WANKHEDE,KORADI KAMPTEE, NAGPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

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

ITA 461/NAG/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleprakash Sheshrao Wankhede, Khaprikoradi, Ward No.6 Near Hanuman Mandir Tehsil Kamptee, Koradi (Nv) ……………. Appellant Nagpur -441 111, Maharashtra. Pan–Abypw7048B V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(4), Nagpur Assessee By: None Revenue By : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR
Section 54F

section 54F was not given without appreciating the fact that the construction was carried out by local contractor & as assessee was staying in small village with no knowledge about the storage of bills. vouchers etc. & there was no requirement for clearance of pollution etc. The lower authorities have passed the orders without properly appreciating the facts and further erred