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.

9 results for “capital gains”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai832Delhi651Jaipur276Chennai238Ahmedabad221Hyderabad192Bangalore179Chandigarh128Kolkata115Cochin111Indore85Nagpur77Pune60Surat57Visakhapatnam54Amritsar39Rajkot34Lucknow34Panaji30Raipur27Guwahati25Cuttack19Jodhpur14Agra13Jabalpur11Patna9Dehradun9Ranchi6Varanasi6Allahabad3

Key Topics

Section 6810Section 2509Cash Deposit7Section 69A6Addition to Income6Section 143(3)5Section 1475Section 143(2)4Section 1444Section 115B

MASUDAN TANTI,BHAGALPUR vs. CIT, NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 29/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bedi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Lalita Kumari, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44

capital account etc. A copy of the notice u/s 142(1) dated 02.12.2021 was also got served physically through the Verification Unit but despite being provided with several opportunities, no compliance was made nor any reply was filed. Meanwhile, information was collected from UCO Bank and it was found that the total amount credited in the bank account

4
Demonetization4

LAVANYA ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITW WARD 2 (1) PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 342/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 342/Pat/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Lavanya Estates Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer, Kasim Colonydargah Road Ward 2(1), Mahendru, Sultanganj, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Dakbanglow, Patna-800 001 Patna, Bihar-800 006 [Pan : Aadcl0333R] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kr. Shukla, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154

deposited huge cash into its bank account during demonetization period though it was not stated in the notice that whether it was limited scrutiny or complete scrutiny. The case of the assessee supported by the decision of Tribunal, Delhi Bench in case of Dev Milk Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 6767/Del/2019 dated 12.06.2020, held as under

ZAIMUR RAHMAN,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 321/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 250Section 68Section 69A

cash deposits in bank, ₹3,45,16,118/- u/s 68 of the Act for unexplained capital, ₹21,08,600/- for unsubstantiated agricultural income treated as income from other sources, ₹33,20,000/- for Short Term Capital Gain

BHARTISH KUMAR,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 306/PAT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: the First Appellate Authority, the status of the decision is as under:

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69A

deposited during demonetisation period. (ii) Rs. 16,75,835/- has been added u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash credits in the bank account, other than during the demonetisation period. Assessment Year 2018-19 (i) An amount of Rs. 4,20,000/- has been added on account of alleged unexplained addition to capital, which has been treated

BHARTISH KUMAR,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 305/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the First Appellate Authority, the status of the decision is as under:

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69A

deposited during demonetisation period. (ii) Rs. 16,75,835/- has been added u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash credits in the bank account, other than during the demonetisation period. Assessment Year 2018-19 (i) An amount of Rs. 4,20,000/- has been added on account of alleged unexplained addition to capital, which has been treated

BHARTISH KUMAR,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 304/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: the First Appellate Authority, the status of the decision is as under:

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69A

deposited during demonetisation period. (ii) Rs. 16,75,835/- has been added u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash credits in the bank account, other than during the demonetisation period. Assessment Year 2018-19 (i) An amount of Rs. 4,20,000/- has been added on account of alleged unexplained addition to capital, which has been treated

AMRENDRA PRATAP SINGH,VARANASI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 3(1), GAYA

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

ITA 101/PAT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna07 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 250Section 251Section 69A

capital gain under the Act. 11. For that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) as well as the ld. assessing officer has erred in holding that the interest aggregating to Rs.1,77,580, being Rs.99,913 credited in ICICI Bank and Rs.77,667 credited in Canara Bank, during the Previous Year 2011-12 corresponding to the Assessment Year

DINESHWAR PRASAD,SARVADYA KAMLA APARTMENT, BORING ROAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PATNA, NOT KNOWN

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

ITA 250/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna01 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.250/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dineshwar Prasad.………………………. …………………....Appellant Sarvadya Kamla Apartment, An Path, North S K Puri, Boring Road, Patna - 800013. [Pan: Acwpp8473C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-4, Patna…..…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S.S.P Singh, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 1St, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.02.2023 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 749 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Petition Explaining The Reasons Or Such Delay. After Considering The Submissions & Materials On Record, We Are Satisfied That There Was Reasonable Cause For The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Said Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

Section 250Section 69

capital gain and other source and filed his return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 by declaring a total income of Rs.8,87,760/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS and notice under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued calling for details and documents in respect of cash deposits

I.T.O. vs. M/S KUMAR CONSTRUCLTION,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 10/PAT/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(b)Section 40A(3)

deposited for ‘hire charges’, vide letter dated 23-09-2011. The extract of the letter is being reproduced below: “…..please explain whether tax has been deducted on it. If yes, furnish your Form 26Q and challan showing the payment of tax deducted. If not, please explain, why it should not be disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia). ” 14. In response