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.

78 results for “capital gains”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai865Delhi438Jaipur267Chennai212Ahmedabad204Hyderabad163Bangalore116Kolkata108Cochin104Nagpur78Indore77Pune73Chandigarh71Surat51Raipur43Rajkot42Amritsar38Visakhapatnam37Guwahati35Panaji29Lucknow25Patna16Agra14Jodhpur12Cuttack11Allahabad11Jabalpur8Ranchi6Dehradun4

Key Topics

Section 153A89Section 143(3)88Section 153C86Addition to Income59Section 6841Section 1124Section 13218Section 14817Section 26317Survey u/s 133A

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

unexplained. Further, the assessee has claim a huge amount of Rs. 7,72,61,368/- as cost of improvement with indexations and no supporting documents/ explanation had been given in support of this claimed made. From the scan copy of the sale deed, it is seen that the sale is of Non-agricultural land admeasuring in total of 7.89 Hectors

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

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

Showing 1–20 of 78 · Page 1 of 4

15
Undisclosed Income11
Unexplained Investment9
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

invested during the peak then sale those shares at low value thereby claiming either Long Term Capital Loss or Short Term Capital Loss. d. Thus, on carefully reading and analyzing the modus operandi stated in the investigation report, it is clearly seen that investors has transacted in penny stock either to earn exempt LTCG or bogus LTCL / STCL. Nowhere

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

invested during the peak then sale those shares at low value thereby claiming either Long Term Capital Loss or Short Term Capital Loss. d. Thus, on carefully reading and analyzing the modus operandi stated in the investigation report, it is clearly seen that investors has transacted in penny stock either to earn exempt LTCG or bogus LTCL / STCL. Nowhere

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

invested during the peak then sale those shares at low value thereby claiming either Long Term Capital Loss or Short Term Capital Loss. d. Thus, on carefully reading and analyzing the modus operandi stated in the investigation report, it is clearly seen that investors has transacted in penny stock either to earn exempt LTCG or bogus LTCL / STCL. Nowhere

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

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

gain on sale of shares of Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. and Premier Capital Services Ltd. is genuine, the assessee has Rajesh Sarda (AY2015-16) ITA 44/Nag/2022 furnished complete documentary evidence during the assessment which includes Sauda Summary Report, copy of client ID, allotment letter of shares, consent letter of assessee, contract notes of Premier Capital Securities Ltd., purchase of share

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

capital gains amounting to ` 94,60,989, on the sale of the said equity shares. On 11/04/2011, the assessee purchased 20,000 shares of Esaar (India) Ltd. @ ` 5 per share aggregating to ` 1,00,000, through a broker M/s Uttam Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Payment for purchase of these shares was made by cheque bearing 8 Shri Sanjay Gaurishankar Agrawal

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

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

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

ITA 171/NAG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2006-07
For Appellant: \nShri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: \nShri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

capital gain of Rs.17.33.880/- on sale of shares\nclaimed exempt u/s.10(38).\n7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on\naccount of disallowance of legal and professional charges of Rs. 2,25,310/-.\n8. 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 293/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

capital gain of Rs.17.33.880/- on sale of shares\nclaimed exempt u/s.10(38).\n7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on\naccount of disallowance of legal and professional charges of Rs. 2,25,310/-.\n8. On the facts

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

ITA 172/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: \nShri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

capital gain of Rs.17.33.880/- on sale of shares\nclaimed exempt u/s.10(38).\n7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on\naccount of disallowance of legal and professional charges of Rs. 2,25,310/-.\n8. On the facts and circumstances

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

investment / deposit in cash and/or by cheques in bank account, etc., and (ii) by estimating income of construction business of M/s.Maria Construction. With regard to assessee's travel business of M.B. Travels also, the Assessing Officer made two types of addition – (i) on account of alleged unexplained deposit/receipt; and (ii) by estimating income of Travel business. Thus, in respect

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

investment / deposit in cash and/or by cheques in bank account, etc., and (ii) by estimating income of construction business of M/s.Maria Construction. With regard to assessee's travel business of M.B. Travels also, the Assessing Officer made two types of addition – (i) on account of alleged unexplained deposit/receipt; and (ii) by estimating income of Travel business. Thus, in respect

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

investment / deposit in cash and/or by cheques in bank account, etc., and (ii) by estimating income of construction business of M/s.Maria Construction. With regard to assessee's travel business of M.B. Travels also, the Assessing Officer made two types of addition – (i) on account of alleged unexplained deposit/receipt; and (ii) by estimating income of Travel business. Thus, in respect

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

investment / deposit in cash and/or by cheques in bank account, etc., and (ii) by estimating income of construction business of M/s.Maria Construction. With regard to assessee's travel business of M.B. Travels also, the Assessing Officer made two types of addition – (i) on account of alleged unexplained deposit/receipt; and (ii) by estimating income of Travel business. Thus, in respect

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

investment / deposit in cash and/or by cheques in bank account, etc., and (ii) by estimating income of construction business of M/s.Maria Construction. With regard to assessee's travel business of M.B. Travels also, the Assessing Officer made two types of addition – (i) on account of alleged unexplained deposit/receipt; and (ii) by estimating income of Travel business. Thus, in respect

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

investment / deposit in cash and/or by cheques in bank account, etc., and (ii) by estimating income of construction business of M/s.Maria Construction. With regard to assessee's travel business of M.B. Travels also, the Assessing Officer made two types of addition – (i) on account of alleged unexplained deposit/receipt; and (ii) by estimating income of Travel business. Thus, in respect

PRITAM SINGH CHARAN SINGH GUJJAR,NAGPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 406/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Bhavesh MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 48Section 50C

Capital Gain declared by the assessee and computed by the Assessing Officer after considering the DVO‟s valuation report. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has disclosed sale consideration of the land as Rs.1,10,00,000/-. During the scrutiny assessment proceedings reference was made to DVO for the valuation of property. The DVO vide report dated