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”+ Section 172clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai330Delhi121Jaipur77Chennai66Cochin63Chandigarh60Bangalore57Hyderabad48Raipur42Ahmedabad25Indore21Nagpur20Kolkata16Rajkot16Pune9Surat7Lucknow7Varanasi6Guwahati5Visakhapatnam4Jodhpur4Agra4Amritsar3Jabalpur2Dehradun1Ranchi1Cuttack1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 14813Section 143(3)7Addition to Income7Section 106Section 54F6Section 1475Section 685Section 2505Section 10(46)5Deduction

MR DNYANESHWAR BABURAO KATHE,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 432/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.432/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mr. Dnyaneshwar Baburao Vs. Ito, Ward-1(3), Pune. Kathe, Janori Dhawa, 10Th Mail Road, Dindori, Nashik- 422206. Pan : Bbppk3199D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Krishna V. Gujarathi Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 13.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.01.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1) On The Facts & In The Circumstance Of The Case & In Law The Honorable Cit(A) Has Erred & Is Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.31,58,740/- By Treating The Cash Deposits Made By The Assessee In The Saving Bank Account Of Dena Bank As Unexplained Income Without Appreciating The Fact That The Said Cash Deposited In The Bank Was Out Of Agriculture Sale Proceeds. The Appellant Prays That The Addition May Please Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Shri Krishna V. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 148Section 3Section 50CSection 54F
5
Capital Gains3
Exemption3

section 2(14) of the IT Act, accordingly Capital Gain cannot be calculated. Alternatively, it was also submitted before the Bench that sale proceeds/long term capital gain in any case was invested in residential building 8 wherein an amount of Rs.32,05,250/- was invested by the assessee. Accordingly, it was claimed that deduction u/s 54F is also allowable

KALAVATHI DEVI SHARMA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, NANDED, NANDED

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1519/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S. Sadananda Singh, JCIT
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 68

capital gain to multiple entities and the financials clearly show that 8 Kalavathi Devi Sharma the company is a shell company. It was noticed that the appellant is one such beneficiary who received fictitious LTCG during the year under appeal. The Appellant did not furnish any explanation to such findings as mentioned in the impugned Assessment. 10.3. Regarding the exemption

ARCHANA PRASHANT DATE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 11(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 190/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Respondent: Appellant by Shri Sarang Gudhate
Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250Section 48Section 50CSection 54

section 54 of the Act for the investment in another residential house which in this case is of new flat purchased at Rs.75,04,825/-. Since the cost of new flat is more than the net capital gain of Rs.65,84,280/-, resulting Nil capital gain but ld.CIT(A) has inadvertently forgot to give the benefit of indexation on cost

TEJASHREE ATUL PATIL,PUNE vs. PR.CIT - 2, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 927/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri C.V.DeshpandeFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 54F

capital gain account, before due date of filing of ROI. As such even on this count you do not appear to be eligible to claim exemption u/s 54F for the second house property purchased on 24.05.2015 3. In this regard, an opportunity of being heard s being provided to you on 01.03.2024 at 03.00 PM. You are requested to make

BHANDARI ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2, PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 1227/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora and Ms. Sampada S IngaleFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

172 Taxation 35 (Del-Trib) f. CIT v. Giridharilal 258 ITR 331 11. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to pages 445 to 704 of the paper book-II submitted that the assessee has duly submitted the complete details in respect of unsecured loans of Rs.36,44,08,934/- such as detailed chart of unsecured loans along with confirmations

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. DILIP MOTILALJI CHORDIA, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as\nthe Cross Objection filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 1486/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 44ASection 96

172 taxmann.com 278 (Delhi-Trib.) wherein the\nHon'ble ITAT has held as under:\n\"Section 96 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 provides exemption\nfrom income tax and stamp duty of the compensation received\non compulsory acquisition made under this Act for public\npurposes. Section 105(1) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 states\nthat provisions of this Act shall

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE,PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE BOARD OF SECONDARY & HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 825/PUN/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Ratnakar Bhimrao Shelake
Section 10Section 10(46)Section 143(1)

172 taxmann.com 568 (Delhi-Trib.), he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that where assessee, an educational institution, claimed exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) only after it received approval under section 10(23C)(i) read with section 10(23C) (vi) for relevant year, it was entitled for claiming exemption under section 10(23C) even though

PRIDE PURPLE BUILDERS PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 (1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 699/PUN/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.699/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pride Purple Builders Private The Deputy Limited, V Commissioner Income Pride House, 5Th Floor, S Tax, Circle-1(1), Pune. S.No.108/7, Shivajinagar, Near Pune University Circle, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aadcp 4286 H Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri M G Jasnani, Irs - Dr Date Of Hearing 03/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 04/10/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Pune-11 Dated 18.08.2022For A.Y.2015-16 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 30.11.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Pride Purple Builders Private Limited [A]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

172 (SC) wherein after discussing the various provisions of the Income Tax Act, the Hon. Supreme Court has held that the assessee cannot claim interest expenses paid on business loan, against interest income assessable u/s 56 of the Act. The relevant portion of the said judgment has been reproduced by the Ld. Assessing Officer in the assessment order

NAVJYOTI FARMING PRIVATE LIMITED,BELAPUR vs. ITO, WARD -3 , PANVEL

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

ITA 1020/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani KumarFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

gains. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices 2 u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act dated 07.08.2013 were issued and served on the assessee, in response to which the assessee filed the requisite details from