Search: capital gains | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 256(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai507 Delhi419 Jaipur150 Karnataka109 Chennai100 Bangalore91 Ahmedabad90 Kolkata77 Cochin65 Hyderabad34 Pune26 Raipur26 Nagpur25 Chandigarh25 Indore25 Calcutta23 Cuttack17 Visakhapatnam16 Lucknow16 SC16 Telangana13 Rajkot12 Amritsar10 Surat9 Agra8 Guwahati7 Panaji4 Allahabad3 Jabalpur2 Patna2 Rajasthan2 Jodhpur2 Dehradun1 Kerala1 Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 1479 Section 50C9 Section 2639 Section 1485 Section 50C(1)5 Section 253(1)3 Section 2503 Reopening of Assessment3 Addition to Income3

MAHENDRA PURUSHOTTAM NAIK GAUNEKAR,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANAJI

Accordingly. The ground thus stands allowed

ITA 12/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 50CSection 50C(1)

section 50C of the Act the Ld. AO brought difference of capital gain of ₹2,93,33,256/- to tax as undisclosed

Undisclosed Income3

Natural Justice3

Section 143(2)2

SONALI MAHENDRA NAIK GAUNEKAR,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 313/PAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Renga Rajan [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 263Section 50C

section 50C of the Act the Ld. AO brought difference of capital gain of ₹2,93,33,256/- to tax as undisclosed

SONALI MAHENDRA NAIK GAUNEKAR,PANAJI vs. ASST. UNIT, NFAC, I. T. DEPARTMENT, DELHI

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 312/PAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Rahul Sarda [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Naveen Kumar [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(1)Section 263Section 50CSection 50C(1)

section 50C of the Act the Ld. AO brought difference of capital gain of ₹2,93,33,256/- to tax as undisclosed

SHRI NITIN A SHIRGURKAR,BELGAVI vs. PR. CIT, HUBBALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowe

ITA 77/PAN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194A(3)(iii)Section 194A(3)(iv)Section 263Section 40

Gain on sale of land or building 3.3 The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Shri Pramod Vaidhy The ld. Counsel for the assessee, Shri Pramod Vaidhya, further drew our , further drew our attention to the order of the ld. Pr. CIT, wherein at page 5 para 4, the ld. Pr. CIT has attention to the order