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.

8 results for “capital gains”+ Section 56(2)(viia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai168Karnataka57Chandigarh53Bangalore50Delhi42Chennai30Hyderabad18Jaipur12Cochin11Pune8Surat8Kolkata7Cuttack7Indore6Ahmedabad4Nagpur4Rajkot2SC2Visakhapatnam2Patna1Amritsar1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 5727Addition to Income8Section 54F7Disallowance4Set Off of Losses4Capital Gains4Deduction4Section 143(3)3Section 563Section 143(2)

RAJENDRA L.AGARWAL,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -I),, PUNE

ITA 2330/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 2330/Pun/2017 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar &
Section 54F

section 56(2)(viia) in the assessee's case does not arise. It may be applicable in the case of Tapti. Hence, no purpose would be served by setting aside the asst. of the assessee. 2.5] Accordingly, the assessee submits that his case is totally genuine and the capital loss on sale of Shivalik shares should be allowed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLHPAUR vs. RBL BANK LTD, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 657/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: Disposed
3
Depreciation3
Section 2712
ITAT Pune
30 Sept 2024
AY 2014-15

Bench: SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

viia) introduced with effect from AY 2014-15. This heins the first year of operation of the Explanation, very less clarity was available on its applicability. 49. The claim of the assessee has been denied by the lower authorities solely based on Explanation 2 to Section 36(l)(vii) introduced by the Finance Act, 2013 with effect from 01st April

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE vs. M/S. JANATA SAHAKARI BANK LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2428/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 143(3)

viia) of the Act. Thus, this ground of appeal no.3 filed by the assessee stands dismissed. 16. Ground of appeal no.4 challenges the disallowance of bad debts amounting to Rs.53,23,92,280/- u/s 36(1)(vii). The Assessing Officer had disallowed the claim of Rs.53,23,92,280/- u/s 36(1)(vii) solely on the ground that the similar

JANATA SAHAKARI BANK LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2641/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 143(3)

viia) of the Act. Thus, this ground of appeal no.3 filed by the assessee stands dismissed. 16. Ground of appeal no.4 challenges the disallowance of bad debts amounting to Rs.53,23,92,280/- u/s 36(1)(vii). The Assessing Officer had disallowed the claim of Rs.53,23,92,280/- u/s 36(1)(vii) solely on the ground that the similar

JANATA SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 6,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2400/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 143(3)

viia) of the Act. Thus, this ground of appeal no.3 filed by the assessee stands dismissed. 16. Ground of appeal no.4 challenges the disallowance of bad debts amounting to Rs.53,23,92,280/- u/s 36(1)(vii). The Assessing Officer had disallowed the claim of Rs.53,23,92,280/- u/s 36(1)(vii) solely on the ground that the similar

KAVITA MANDAR BHAGWAT,,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, PUNE

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 681/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sanghamitra Khobragade
Section 56Section 57

capital gains and income from other sources ( interest from bonds) during the assessment year under consideration . In the return of income assessee has claimed write off advance in installments of Rs. 15,00,000/- out of Rs. 4,15,88,223/-. It was the case of the assessee that in the year 1996 the husband of the assessee had given

KAVITA MANDAR BHAGWAT,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(4),, PUNE

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1313/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sanghamitra Khobragade
Section 56Section 57

capital gains and income from other sources ( interest from bonds) during the assessment year under consideration . In the return of income assessee has claimed write off advance in installments of Rs. 15,00,000/- out of Rs. 4,15,88,223/-. It was the case of the assessee that in the year 1996 the husband of the assessee had given

KAVITA MANDAR BHAGWAT,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(4),, PUNE

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1312/PUN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sanghamitra Khobragade
Section 56Section 57

capital gains and income from other sources ( interest from bonds) during the assessment year under consideration . In the return of income assessee has claimed write off advance in installments of Rs. 15,00,000/- out of Rs. 4,15,88,223/-. It was the case of the assessee that in the year 1996 the husband of the assessee had given