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 364clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai303Delhi221Karnataka99Chandigarh59Bangalore58Chennai58Ahmedabad57Jaipur47Calcutta36Kolkata35Hyderabad34Raipur20Pune18Lucknow17Indore15Agra9Nagpur8Cochin8SC7Telangana4Allahabad3Cuttack3Visakhapatnam2Surat2Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Amritsar1Panaji1

Key Topics

Business Income7Section 13(1)(c)6Section 696Unexplained Investment6Addition to Income6Section 114Section 402Section 13(3)2

LOKMANYA TILAD JANAKALYA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 384/NAG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 1Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 40

gains of business or profession. However as it has already been held by me in ground no. 2 to 4 that assessee is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 this argument of the appellant is not tenable. The requirement to deduct tax at source does not exclude entities which are exempted u/s :11. The intent of the legislature was that

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

364 ` 1,05,47,818 ` 1,05,47,818 Unexplained credit ` 39,82,675 in bank Relating to Maria Construction Estimated business ` 4,07,700 income 2009–10 ` 43,90,373 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 3,765 business Commission on ` 90,976 Travel M.B. Travel ` 12,32,787 ` 13,27,528 ` 57,17,903 ` 57,17,903 Smt. Fatema

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

364 ` 1,05,47,818 ` 1,05,47,818 Unexplained credit ` 39,82,675 in bank Relating to Maria Construction Estimated business ` 4,07,700 income 2009–10 ` 43,90,373 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 3,765 business Commission on ` 90,976 Travel M.B. Travel ` 12,32,787 ` 13,27,528 ` 57,17,903 ` 57,17,903 Smt. Fatema

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

364 ` 1,05,47,818 ` 1,05,47,818 Unexplained credit ` 39,82,675 in bank Relating to Maria Construction Estimated business ` 4,07,700 income 2009–10 ` 43,90,373 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 3,765 business Commission on ` 90,976 Travel M.B. Travel ` 12,32,787 ` 13,27,528 ` 57,17,903 ` 57,17,903 Smt. Fatema

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

364 ` 1,05,47,818 ` 1,05,47,818 Unexplained credit ` 39,82,675 in bank Relating to Maria Construction Estimated business ` 4,07,700 income 2009–10 ` 43,90,373 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 3,765 business Commission on ` 90,976 Travel M.B. Travel ` 12,32,787 ` 13,27,528 ` 57,17,903 ` 57,17,903 Smt. Fatema

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

364 ` 1,05,47,818 ` 1,05,47,818 Unexplained credit ` 39,82,675 in bank Relating to Maria Construction Estimated business ` 4,07,700 income 2009–10 ` 43,90,373 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 3,765 business Commission on ` 90,976 Travel M.B. Travel ` 12,32,787 ` 13,27,528 ` 57,17,903 ` 57,17,903 Smt. Fatema

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

364 ` 1,05,47,818 ` 1,05,47,818 Unexplained credit ` 39,82,675 in bank Relating to Maria Construction Estimated business ` 4,07,700 income 2009–10 ` 43,90,373 Relating to Travel Unexplained credit ` 3,765 business Commission on ` 90,976 Travel M.B. Travel ` 12,32,787 ` 13,27,528 ` 57,17,903 ` 57,17,903 Smt. Fatema

SAHEBRAO R. PATIL,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 405/NAG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.405/Nag/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009–10 Smt. Saroj Sahebrao Patil, L/H Of Late Shri Sahebrao R. Patil, Tikekar Road, Dhantoli, Nagpur. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Acrpp0905C बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward–1(3), ……""यथ" / Respondent Nagpur. Assessee By : Shri C. J. Thakar, Adv. Revenue By : Shri U. U. Kasar, Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-I, Nagpur Dated 21.08.2013 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :–

For Appellant: Shri C. J. Thakar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

capital gains. The market value of the said property was Rs.87,47,000/–. The property was referred to the Valuation Cell, Nagpur. The DVO valued the said property at Rs.74,34,364/–. As per DVO, the ‘cost of acquisition’ of the said property as on 01.04.1981 is valued or calculated at 3 Rs.1,97,599/–. When the proposal to disturb