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.

7 results for “capital gains”+ Section 111clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai637Delhi564Bangalore200Ahmedabad179Chennai177Jaipur162Karnataka113Kolkata98Cochin84Chandigarh66Indore62Pune55Calcutta50Hyderabad43Raipur39Surat28Nagpur25Cuttack24Visakhapatnam23Lucknow22Jodhpur12Telangana8Patna7Ranchi7Guwahati7Amritsar7Agra6Rajkot6SC5Allahabad4Kerala3Rajasthan3Panaji2Andhra Pradesh1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 2508Section 136Section 1484Limitation/Time-bar4Section 1473Condonation of Delay3Section 194J2Section 44A2Section 1942Section 292B

KRIPA SHANKER,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), PATNA

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

ITA 117/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 54

capital gains was chargeable as per the provisions of section 54F of the Act. As regards the delay in filing the appeal, it was submitted that the assessee was not aware that the appeal order had been passed. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the appellate authority and requested that the same may be confirmed. 6. We have

SAROJ DEVI,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

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

2
Penalty2
TDS2
ITA 242/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250

capital gains at ₹81,66,750/-, which was added to the total income as per the return shown at ₹1,60,000/- and the total income was assessed at ₹83,26,750/-. 4. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who issued several notices of hearing to the assessee and since there

RAJ KUMAR SINGH ,PATNA vs. ITO,WARD-6(4),PATNA , PATNA

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

ITA 341/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 250

capital gains was assessed. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal on account of non-prosecution as the assessee failed to comply with 7 notices issued for hearing nor the assessee attempted to file any documents, evidences and explanation in support of the grounds of appeal

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

Capital Gain on sale of immovable property and the total income was computed at ₹4,62,56,388 /-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who issued several notices and though it is mentioned in the appeal order at page 4 that the assessee was issued a final show cause notice

SHEKHAR NARAYAN,PATNA vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 355/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 13Section 194Section 194JSection 250Section 44A

capital gain. ITA Nos.: 354 & 355/PAT/2025 AYs: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Shekhar Narayan. 16. For that the appellant reserves its right to furnish detailed written submission along with evidences and documents on or before the date of hearing. 17. For that the appellant may be given opportunity of personal hearing physically or virtually as the law permits at the time

SHEKHAR NARAYAN,PATNA vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 354/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 13Section 194Section 194JSection 250Section 44A

capital gain. ITA Nos.: 354 & 355/PAT/2025 AYs: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Shekhar Narayan. 16. For that the appellant reserves its right to furnish detailed written submission along with evidences and documents on or before the date of hearing. 17. For that the appellant may be given opportunity of personal hearing physically or virtually as the law permits at the time

ALOK KUMAR,MADHEPURA vs. ITO WARD 3(5), SAHARSA

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

ITA 467/PAT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraalok Kumar, Ito Ward-3(5), S/O Sri Dasrath Mehata, Saharsha Village- Ganeshpur, M.S. Vs Yogiraj, Purani Madhepura, Dist- Madhepura – 852116 (Bihar) (Pan: Bpkpk1186D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : K.P. Jalan, Ar Respondent By : Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 16.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 O R D E R Per Rakesh Mishra: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 14.05.2024. 2 Alok Kumar, Ay: 2012-13 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: K.P. Jalan, ARFor Respondent: Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 292BSection 54F

capital gains arising on sale of land worth ₹1,66,07,000/- as the assessee was found to have sold 2 pieces of land and a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. In pursuance to the notice u/s 148 dt. 25.03.2019, the assessee had filed ITR-2 on 25.05.2019, however, it has been alleged in the assessment