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 13clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai5,895Delhi4,638Bangalore2,011Chennai1,697Kolkata1,309Ahmedabad1,182Jaipur953Hyderabad852Pune698Surat529Chandigarh494Indore436Karnataka402Cochin277Visakhapatnam273Raipur243Rajkot190Nagpur181Cuttack143Agra124Amritsar123Lucknow105Guwahati90Panaji88Calcutta86SC85Telangana83Ranchi53Dehradun53Jodhpur50Patna45Jabalpur28Allahabad22Kerala19Varanasi13Rajasthan8Orissa6Punjab & Haryana4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Gauhati2Andhra Pradesh2Himachal Pradesh1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1

Key Topics

Section 260A2Section 1432Section 2712Penalty2Addition to Income2

BHARTI BHUSHAN JINDAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUDHIANA

ITA/385/2014HC Punjab & Haryana03 Jul 2025

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 271Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 41(1)Section 56Section 57

gains and other sources. The income from other sources comprises of interest income received from banks and FDRs and also on unsecured loans. The total interest received on loans by the assessee during the year was Rs.4,17,600/-. The claim of the assessee is VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.07.07 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this

INDERPAL SINGH AHUJA vs. THE ASSESSING OFFICER-CUM-A.C.I.T. ORS

ITA/338/2006HC Punjab & Haryana19 Feb 2026

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Section 260A

Section 260A can examine question of jurisdiction of Assessing Officer to enhance declared sale consideration. Having held that Assessing Officer had jurisdiction to enhance declared sale consideration for the purpose of assessment of capital gain, the question remains whether there was some evidence to reject declared value. The appellant is claiming that there was no concrete evidence to reject declared

M/S PANCHSHEEL TEXTILE MANFAC. & TRAD. vs. C I T AND ANR.

ITA/109/2007HC Punjab & Haryana13 May 2025

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

13. pur rele trad (O&M) and other connected ca uction under Section 36(1)(iii) ey borrowed for utilisation in the fore proceeding further it would come Tax Act, 1961 before ame vant and applicable in the years eproduce relevant portion of the arned Income Tax Tribunal, Cha levant portion of Section 36(1)(i ther Deductions:- ction

CIT-I CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PB.INFO&COMM. TECH. CORP. LTD. CHD.

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/398/2009HC Punjab & Haryana18 Jan 2023

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Section 143Section 271

Section 145 of the Act, unless he comes to a conclusion that notified accounting standards had not been regularly followed by such assessee. As such, the assessee could not be compelled to adopt completion method for one particular year on selective basis as in our considered opinion, that would certainly amount to distorting the computation of the true profits