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.

43 results for “capital gains”+ Section 84clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,060Delhi631Chennai226Jaipur214Ahmedabad211Bangalore196Hyderabad132Kolkata129Chandigarh123Cochin82Raipur75Indore58Pune56Lucknow48Panaji43Nagpur43Rajkot40Surat38SC35Visakhapatnam34Guwahati28Amritsar20Dehradun12Ranchi10Cuttack10Agra9Patna9Jodhpur8K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Jabalpur1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 153C99Section 143(3)41Addition to Income41Section 153A39Section 6833Section 25012Section 26312Section 143(2)10Section 139(1)9

VINAY RAMSHARANDAS AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 110/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 263

84,493 Long Term Capital Gains on sale of above 12,65,15,507 mentioned immovable properties However, no supporting documents or explanation with regard to the claim of cost of acquisition with indexation, cost of improvement with indexation and expenditure wholly and exclusively in connection with transfer has been called for by the AO. 3. On perusal of sale

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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3

Business Income7
Unexplained Cash Credit7
Deduction7
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

84,34,115/- during the previous year relevant to Asstt. Year 2014-2015 and shown book profit at Rs. 2,79,05,115/-. Since the period of holding of the shares is more than one year the capital gain transaction were long term capital of the assessee and exempted U/s. 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee

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

84,34,115/- during the previous year relevant to Asstt. Year 2014-2015 and shown book profit at Rs. 2,79,05,115/-. Since the period of holding of the shares is more than one year the capital gain transaction were long term capital of the assessee and exempted U/s. 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee

JEETENDRA CHANDRAKANT NAYAK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOM TAX(OSD), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 368/NAG/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2024AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Shri M.G.Moryani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

capital gain. [ As per the above said amendment, in sub-section (1) to section 54 of the Act, for the words “constructed, a residential house”, the words “constructed, one residential house” have been substituted w.e.f. 01.04.2015. 5.3.2 In the present case, the assessee purchased more than one residential flat vide two different sale deeds, i.e. two flats and claimed deduction

RAJESH SARDA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, the addition of undisclosed income under section 68 is deleted

ITA 44/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Rajesh Sarda, Acit, Central Circle – 2(2), Nagpur 14, Daga Lay–Out, Ambazari Road, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440033. Maharashtra – 440001. [Pan: Ahaps4925M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 153ASection 234ASection 254(1)Section 68Section 69C

84,83,706/- and Rs.56,54,511/- is unjustified, unsustainable and perverse. 5) The learned A.O. and Hon'ble CIT(A) ought to have accepted the claim of exemption u/s 10(38) and accepted the income declared in return considering facts and evidence on record and without dislodging the same. 6) That on the facts and in the circumstances

MANISHA ASHUTOSH SHEWALKAR,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 67/NAG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 234A

84, to M/s Varon Auto Cast Ltd., which was valued at ` 4.50 crore, which was more than the valuation of ` 1,91,75,000, as determined by the Stamp Duty authority. For the assessment year 2014–15, the assessee had filed her return of income, but has not offered the Capital Gain Tax stating that the asset sold

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1, NAGPUR vs. M/S RAGHAV FINVEST PVT LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 121/NAG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

gains of business. This proposition has been duly re-cognized by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court and Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. This view has recently been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s G.S. Homes & Hotels P. Ltd. vs. DCIT in Civil Appeal No.(s) 7379-7380 of 2016 vide order dated

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. VISHNU GILTS PVT.LT, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 237/NAG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

gains of business. This proposition has been duly re-cognized by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court and Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. This view has recently been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s G.S. Homes & Hotels P. Ltd. vs. DCIT in Civil Appeal No.(s) 7379-7380 of 2016 vide order dated

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR vs. M/S NIHAL GITS PVT.LTD , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 95/NAG/2018[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2012-2013

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

gains of business. This proposition has been duly re-cognized by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court and Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. This view has recently been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s G.S. Homes & Hotels P. Ltd. vs. DCIT in Civil Appeal No.(s) 7379-7380 of 2016 vide order dated

INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD -5, AMRAVATI vs. JITENDRA PRANSINGH THAKUR , AMRAVATI

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 108/NAG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)

gains recomputation in light of section 50C of the Act. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant stand as well since the provisions of section 50C of the Act (in case of the vendor of the capital asset concerned) applicable mutatis mutandis in section 56(2)(vii)(b) in the concerned vendee’s case. We accordingly conclude

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

gain. Therefore such an advance was clearly given by the assessee for the purpose of commercial expediency. • 4.4 As far as interest expenses vis-a- vis section 57 is concerned. The assessee wishes to submit that, the section 57(iii), lays down 17 Ravindra Madanlal Khandelwal ITA no.375/Nag./2024 following conditions for claim of expenditure. o The expenditure must have

SMS TOLLS AND DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in terms indicated above

ITA 348/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

Section (2(22)(e) of the Act which defines the expression accumulated profit as under:- Explanation 2:- The expression "accumulated profits" in sub clauses (a),(b), (d) and (e), shall include all profits of the company up to the date of distribution or payment referred to in those clauses, and in sub clause (c) shall include all profits

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the A

ITA 391/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur27 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

84,568/- and were purchased for collecting daily deposits from the members of the society. The useful life of the machine is only one year and hence debited to revenue account rather than capitalizing in fixed assets. The AO disregarded the submission of the appellant and said that since the pigmy machines had long enduring benefits the same should

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 390/NAG/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur27 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, the society cannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this amount in bank so as to earn interest, the said interest income is attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities to its members only. The society is not carrying

LALITA SANJIVREDDY BODKURWAR,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 90/NAG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

section 263 cannot be taken. However in the present case, the AO has not made any informed opinion. He has not collected the entire facts, nor weighed them against any judicial precedents. The Assessing Officer has acted merely as an approver and ignored both his core functions of investigation and adjudication. 6 ITA.No.90/Nag./2020 7. As discussed above

HIMMAT RAMJIBHAI PATEL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 479/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 147Section 148Section 151A

section 151A of the Act read with Notification No 18/2022 dated 29.09.2022? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) was justified in affirming the order of the assessing officer by allowing only 25% of cost of improvement claimed and disallowed balance 75%. 2 Himmat Ramjibhai Patel ITA no.479/Nag./2024 3. Assessee craves leave

NITIN MADANLAL KHANDELWAL,AKOLA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AKOLA, AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 55/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Shubham JainFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 57

capital gain. But this is contrary to his claims that as the statutes did not allow KJAPL to borrow from open market, the appellant had no other choice but to take loan in his personal capacity to advance loan to the company. The case of S. A. Builders Ltd. vs CIT Appeal (civil) 5811 of 2006, is not applicable

PRECISION COMPONENT HIGHTECH LTD,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as above for all the seven years

ITA 97/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234B

84,990. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority. 8. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the submissions made by the assessee. The assessee again being aggrieved is in appeal before the Tribunal. 9. The learned Authorised Representative drew our attention to Satisfaction Note under section 153C

PRECISION COMPONENT HIGHTECH LTD,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as above for all the seven years

ITA 92/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234B

84,990. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority. 8. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the submissions made by the assessee. The assessee again being aggrieved is in appeal before the Tribunal. 9. The learned Authorised Representative drew our attention to Satisfaction Note under section 153C

PRECISION COMPONENT HIGHTECH LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed as above for all the seven years

ITA 91/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 234B

84,990. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority. 8. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the submissions made by the assessee. The assessee again being aggrieved is in appeal before the Tribunal. 9. The learned Authorised Representative drew our attention to Satisfaction Note under section 153C