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.

43 results for “capital gains”+ TDSclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai741Delhi597Chennai214Bangalore178Ahmedabad125Chandigarh121Jaipur91Hyderabad75Kolkata72Cochin68Raipur47Pune43Indore37Visakhapatnam31Lucknow28Surat25Nagpur15Cuttack14Dehradun13Amritsar11Rajkot10Agra9Patna8Guwahati7Jodhpur5Jabalpur4Panaji4Ranchi4

Key Topics

Section 14734Section 14834TDS26Addition to Income25Section 270A22Section 26320Section 143(3)17Section 142(1)15Section 143(2)14Deduction

VAISHALI KESHAV KULKARNI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 13(2), PUNE

In the result the Grounds Numbers 2, 3 and 4 raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 540/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2025AY 2015-16
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250

Capital Gain Rs.24,00,000/- \n5. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Ld. AO under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act, the appellant presents this appeal before Your Honor.\"\n5.1 Inspite of providing documentary evidence that assessee is not the owner of the impugned property, her father is owner and her father has paid entire

SMITA VIRENDRA LODHA,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, AHMEDNAGAR

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

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3

12
Capital Gains12
Penalty11
ITA 1980/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Prasad BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 270A

capital gain on sale of urban agricultural land. TDS must have been made u/s 1941A by the buyer of the property

RAMCHANDRAUDAYSINGHJADHAVRAO,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, PUNE

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

ITA 1399/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Feb 2025AY 2016-17
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 45(2)

capital gain income of Rs.10.74 crores. He however, directed the\nAssessing Officer to delete the penalty on addition of Rs.79 lakhs declared as\nbusiness income of M/s. JKG Developers.\n7. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal\nbefore the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:\n1.\nThe learned CIT(A), Pune-11 erred

SUSHMA PRAMOD NIMHAN,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 2(3), PUNE

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

ITA 1513/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Prakik B. SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54B

capital gain tax. The fact that the TDS of 1% i.e. Rs.1,76,750/- has been deducted by the purchaser

INDRAJEET SURESH MAGAR,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLHAPUR

ITA 755/PUN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.755/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Indrajeet Suresh Magar, Ito, Ward-2(1), Kolhapur. 100, Saroj Niwas, Ruikar Vs. Colony, Kolhapur- 416003. Pan : Aiapm7745G अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""थ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Farrukh Mohammad Munir Mulla Department By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 30-09-2025 Date Of 29-10-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.07.2024 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2018-19. 2. There Is Delay Of 172 Days In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After Hearing Both The Sides, We Condone The Delay Of 172 Days & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeal. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Incorrect Assessment Year: The Sale Of The Property On 12.04.2018 Should Be Taxable In Ay 2019-20, But It Has Been Incorrectly Assessed In Ay 2018- 19 By The Assessing Officer. 2. Proportional Taxation: The Assessee'S Ownership Is Only 50% & Hence The Capital Gain Should Be Taxed Proportionately. The Assessing Officer Has Failed To Account For This.

For Appellant: Shri Farrukh MohammadFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 147Section 148A

capital gain – ((maximum amount not chargeable to tax i.e. 2,50,000 – interest income)) * 20%. The Assessing Officer has used an incorrect formula. 5. TDS

FARHEEZ ERUCH AGA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 1870/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133(6)

capital gain of Rs.12,06,52,000/-. We find the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC upheld the action of the Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee could not substantiate with any satisfactory explanation regarding the payment of such commission. A perusal of 7 the outcome of notices issued u/s 133(6) of the Act shows the following result which

REXEL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 981/PUN/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 May 2025
Section 32(1)Section 43(1)Section 43(6)

Gains\" and Section 47 of the Act specifically excludes transfer\nof capital assets, pursuant to a scheme of amalgamation, from the\npurview of Section 45 of the Act. Therefore, we are of the view that\nthese provisions have no relevance to the facts of the present case.\n26. The Revenue, vide its written submissions, has relied upon certain\njudicial pronouncements

MANIKRAO AMRUTRAO SATAV,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-12, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

ITA 391/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.391/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Manikrao Amrutrao Satav, At Post Wagholi, Tal.Haveli, Nr. Jain College, Wagholi – 412207. Pan: Banps2490G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Smt Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

capital gain, however echoing the findings of Ld. AO. has confirmed the addition made u/s 69A of the Act. 2.3 Still aggrieved by the aforestated addition made u/s 69A of the Act, the appellate assessee set-up the present appeal with following grounds alleging the very jurisdiction of Ld. AO as extra-territorial in the absence of prior approval from

NANASAHEB BHAGAWAN SASAR,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 2(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 722/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 194ASection 234A

TDS deducted and credited to his account as reflected in Form 26AS amounting to Rs.13,00,000/-. However, the long term capital 2 ITA No.722/PUN/2025, AY 2022-23 gain

SAGAR JAYWANT ELAWANDE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD13(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 224/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.224/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sagar Jaywant Elawande, Vs. Ito, Ward-13(1), Pune. 457, Shaniwar Peth, Pune City, Pune- 411030. Pan : Aampe1025B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Digambar Surwase Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 26.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.12.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Derived Income From Salary & Also Sold Immovable Property But Return Of Income Was Not Filed. On The Basis Of Above Information, The Case Was Reopened U/S 147 & Notices U/S 148A(B), 148 & 142(1) Respectively Were Issued To The Assessee. Since The Assessee Did Not Reply To Any Of The Notices

For Appellant: Shri Digambar SurwaseFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 147Section 148ASection 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 69

TDS was already deducted which was appearing in Form 26AS, secondly no capital gain was arising on sale of immovable

NARARSHABH SHARMA,PUNE vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 7(3), PUNE, AAYAKAR SADAN PUNE

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

ITA 1530/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia-JCIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 140BSection 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 80T

capital gains at Rs. 12,62,869/-; and income from other sources at Rs. 94,744/- and after claiming deduction u/s. 80TTA, the total income is worked out to Rs. 17,56,800/- and TDS

TEJAS SHIVAJI ADSUL,KOLHAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 59/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri A.R. Naik (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva
Section 115JSection 143Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 270A(6)

TDS of Rs 80,000/- appeared in 26AS statement of appellant for the year. The AO noticed that no return of income has been filed by appellant for the year despite having Income from capital gain

SANTOSH SHANKAR GUJAR,NEAR VITTHAL RUKMINI MANDIR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 8(3), PUNE, AKURDI, PUNE

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

ITA 1654/PUN/2024[2014 - 2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1654 & 2038/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2013-14 Santosh Shankar Gujar, Vs. Ito, Ward-8(3), Pune. H/No.246, Shiv Parvati Bunglow, Laxmi Nagar, Thergaon- 411033. Pan : Alnpg9944K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mrs. Vibha D. Gulabani Revenue By : Shri Umesh Phade Date Of Hearing : 02.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 05.06.2024 & 29.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1654/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2014-15 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Mrs. Vibha D. GulabaniFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Phade
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 250Section 45Section 54F

Capital Gains. 10) Exemption u/s 54F shall be allowed on Rs. 93,00,000/- being appropriated as per provisions of law against Rs. 1,00,00,000/- received partly on 20/09/2016 towards sale of land. 11) The appellant had to pay compensation of Rs. 38,00,000/- on late payment to other parties as per court order due to delayed

SANTOSH SHANKAR GUJAR,LAXMI NAGAR, THERGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 8(3), PUNE, AKURDI, PUNE

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

ITA 2038/PUN/2024[2013 - 2014]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1654 & 2038/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2013-14 Santosh Shankar Gujar, Vs. Ito, Ward-8(3), Pune. H/No.246, Shiv Parvati Bunglow, Laxmi Nagar, Thergaon- 411033. Pan : Alnpg9944K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mrs. Vibha D. Gulabani Revenue By : Shri Umesh Phade Date Of Hearing : 02.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: Both The Above Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 05.06.2024 & 29.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1654/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2014-15 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Mrs. Vibha D. GulabaniFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Phade
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 250Section 45Section 54F

Capital Gains. 10) Exemption u/s 54F shall be allowed on Rs. 93,00,000/- being appropriated as per provisions of law against Rs. 1,00,00,000/- received partly on 20/09/2016 towards sale of land. 11) The appellant had to pay compensation of Rs. 38,00,000/- on late payment to other parties as per court order due to delayed

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

capital gain from sale of TDR as exempt\nfrom tax u/s.96 of the Right to Fair Compensation and\nTransparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement\nAct, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act).\n2. The brief facts of the case is that during the course of assessment\nproceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the Respondent's\ncapital account had increased by Rs.6

DREAMS BELLE VUE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 2 (1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 1157/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

TDS amounting to Rs.3,42,744\nought to be granted either to the Appellant AOP or, in the alternative,\nto the respective members who have duly offered the corresponding\nincome in their individual returns of income.\n4.\nThe Appellant craves to add/modify/amend/delete all / any of\ngrounds of appeal.\"\n4.\nBriefly stated the facts are that the assessee is an Association

DREAMS BELLE VUE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD-2(3), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 1158/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

TDS amounting to Rs.3,42,744\nought to be granted either to the Appellant AOP or, in the alternative,\nto the respective members who have duly offered the corresponding\nincome in their individual returns of income.\n4.\nThe Appellant craves to add/modify/amend/delete_all / any of\ngrounds of appeal.\"\n4.\nBriefly stated the facts are that the assessee is an Association

CHANDRAKANT VITHTHAL BHOPI,RAIGAD vs. ITO WARD 1 , PANVEL

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

ITA 2405/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 Chandrakant Viththal Bhopi Ito, Ward-1, Panvel At Chinchpada, Post Panvel, Tal. Vs. Panvel, Dist. Raigad – 410206 Pan: Bjdpb7610L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Ajinkya M Vaishampayan Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 05-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-05-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 2(14)Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

capital gains from compensation or enhanced compensation from land acquisition, but not on interest on such compensation. In the present instance, the amount represents interest on enhanced compensation, but the compensation or enhanced compensation itself. Thirdly, reference is made to Section 57 (iv) rws 56(2)(viii). Section 57(iv) gives benefit of 50% deduction on amounts mentioned

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 725/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ratan SamalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)

TDS. Thus, he submits that the appellant had discharged the onus lying upon it in terms of provisions of section 19 IT(SS)A Nos.91 to 96/PUN/2022 IT(SS)A Nos.97 & 98/PUN/2022 68 of the Act. In the circumstances, the AO was not justified in making the addition of unsecured loans. E. As regards, the addition made on account

ARMED FORCES EX-OFFICERS MULTISERVICES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS NFAC, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 787/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: CA Shweta JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

capital gains amounting to INR 20,17,659/- twice while computing the income as per the assessment order under section 147 rws 144 rws 1448 dated 26 March 2022. Also, Tax credits such as TDS