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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 271D(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur23Hyderabad16Delhi13Visakhapatnam12Chennai10Surat10Bangalore8Ahmedabad6Kolkata6Mumbai5Indore5Pune4Agra3SC2Nagpur2Chandigarh2Cuttack1Rajkot1Patna1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)6Section 12A6Section 269S3Section 142(1)3Section 1443Penalty3Section 271(1)(b)2Section 2642Section 1272Capital Gains

SHRI GANESH RAMCHANDRA MORE,PANVEL vs. ITO, WARD-9(3), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 2747/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Apr 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri B. C. Malakar &
Section 269Section 269SSection 275(1)(c)Section 45

capital gains within the provisions of section 45 to 48 of the I T Act, 1961, the appellant was entitled to get the benefit of Cost of Acquisition/Indexed Cost of Acquisition for this relevant Assessment Year. The Assessing Officer be directed to allow such Cost of Acquisition after considering the purchase deed of the said property. 2. On the facts

MRS BALBIR KAUR BIRDIE ,MADHYA PRADESH vs. ITO 11(3), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

2
Addition to Income2
ITA 1466/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 264Section 271(1)(b)

2 ITA.No.1466/PUN./2024 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that assessee had originally filed his return of income on 30.03.2018 declaring total income of Rs.75,55,050/-. The Assessing Officer passed the order u/sec.143(3) on 25.10.2018 accepting the returned income. Subsequently, on realizing that certain errors have crept in the return filed while computing the capital

M.M. PATEL PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,SOLAPUR vs. PCIT- CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 1130/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2025
Section 12Section 127Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

271D and 271(1)(b)... and so on. An exercise of missing two\nseparate orders under one common order, is besides the law and\nwholly incorrect.\nD. Mis-match of authorities (without prejudice to main challenges)\nFrom a collective perusal of sections 12AA/12AB, etc. it reveals that,\npower to cancel \"registration\" u/s 12A/12AA/12AB exists with the\nsame authority which grants

SURESH BABANRAO JADHAV,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 13(2),, PUNE

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

ITA 555/PUN/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Mar 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. K. Verma
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 269SSection 271DSection 54F

capital gains were reinvested as per the provisions of section 54F of the Act. The Assessing Officer accepted the said claim of the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee took loan of Rs.50,000/- each from 10 persons totalling to Rs.5,00,000/-. The said amount was deposited in Janseva Sahakari Bank Ltd. as fixed deposits