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”+ Addition to Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai6,720Delhi5,567Chennai2,161Bangalore2,138Kolkata1,751Ahmedabad1,150Jaipur806Hyderabad782Pune714Chandigarh377Indore356Surat260Cochin230Nagpur205Raipur202Visakhapatnam151Rajkot151Lucknow150Amritsar105Agra90Patna87SC75Panaji71Dehradun67Guwahati59Calcutta58Cuttack57Karnataka53Jodhpur50Ranchi39Jabalpur38Allahabad23Kerala16Telangana11Varanasi10Rajasthan9Orissa7Punjab & Haryana6Andhra Pradesh2Gauhati2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1

Key Topics

Section 686Addition to Income5Section 271(1)4Natural Justice3Section 2742

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT LTD

ITA/6/2021HC Rajasthan01 Nov 2022

Bench: SANDEEP MEHTA,KULDEEP MATHUR

For Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

income from other sources”. 11.5 The contention of the Ld. AR is that since there is no cost of acquisition, it is not possible to compute capital gain as section 55(2) of the I.T. Act does not include this kind of asset as capital asset. For better understanding, we will examine the provisions of section

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HARI NARAIN PARWAL

ITA/90/2020HC Rajasthan21 Feb 2024

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,SHUBHA MEHTA

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 271
Section 271(1)
Section 271(1)(c)
Section 274

income from short term capital gain Rs. 97,02,942/- and long term capital loss Rs. 350,31,73,044/- was claimed as exempt. 7. During the assessment proceedings, it was noticed that the assessee had claimed advances written off under the head “other expenses” in the P & L and loss from business was primarily due to this. 8. Assessment

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/44/2025HC Rajasthan24 Mar 2026

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SHUBHA MEHTA

Section 68

addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of assessment made by the AO that there was bogus amount of capital gain

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SHRI RAJ RAJESHWARI GUPTA,

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/46/2025HC Rajasthan24 Mar 2026

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SHUBHA MEHTA

Section 68

addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of assessment made by the AO that there was bogus amount of capital gain

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SHRI PAWAN GUPTA,

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/45/2025HC Rajasthan24 Mar 2026

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SHUBHA MEHTA

Section 68

addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of assessment made by the AO that there was bogus amount of capital gain

DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS)

ITA/7/2020HC Rajasthan17 Mar 2021

Bench: SANGEET LODHA,RAMESHWAR VYAS

Income Tax Officer, Salary Circle[39]) and not prior thereto.Any expenditure which the Government incurs, in implementing its policies, should be authorized by the Appropriation Act which is a law as contemplated by Article 282 (Bhim Singh[31]; S. Subramaniam Balaji[36] and Rai Sahib Ram Jawaya Kapur[38]) which stipulates that the Union or the States may make

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI SANJAY CHHABRA

ITA/31/2021HC Rajasthan06 May 2022

Bench: Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

Capital Transportation Financial Services Ltd. v. Tarun Bhargava25, this Court reiterated that in cases involving private employment, the scope of judicial review is limited, and the remedies are governed solely by contract law principles. It was affirmed that the rights of the employees are confined to what is stipulated in the contract, and even if termination is wrongful, Courts will

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL, vs. MS. HARSHITA MAHESHWARI,

ITA/94/2020HC Rajasthan21 Feb 2024

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,SHUBHA MEHTA

Income Tax, Central, Calcutta 13 to explain the position of a shareholder. This decision was referred to in J.P. Srivastava & Sons Private Limited and Others Versus Gwalior Sugar Company Limited and Others

M/S FINGROWTH COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/9/2020HC Rajasthan24 Aug 2023

Bench: AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH,SAMEER JAIN

Income Tax, Central, Calcutta 13 to explain the position of a shareholder. This decision was referred to in J.P. Srivastava & Sons Private Limited and Others Versus Gwalior Sugar Company Limited and Others