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.

6 results for “capital gains”+ Section 56(2)(vii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai979Delhi977Bangalore383Ahmedabad297Chennai246Jaipur214Karnataka177Kolkata135Chandigarh132Hyderabad109Indore95Raipur87Cochin75Pune63Calcutta51Cuttack45Panaji44Rajkot43Guwahati33Nagpur33Surat29Lucknow25Agra18Telangana17SC17Amritsar7Jodhpur7Visakhapatnam6Ranchi6Dehradun5Kerala5Rajasthan4Varanasi3Orissa2Patna2Jabalpur1Andhra Pradesh1Allahabad1Punjab & Haryana1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 56(2)(vii)9Section 69B7Section 143(3)6Section 50C5Addition to Income5Section 1483Section 1473Capital Gains3Section 1442Section 143(1)

DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI vs. SHRI ANUP CHAWLA, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 8/RAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi22 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: None appearedFor Respondent: Shri Chandan Das, JCIT/ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69B

capital gains tax calculation. Further the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act was enacted by the Finance

2
Long Term Capital Gains2
Unexplained Investment2

ASHUTOSH JHA,RANCHI vs. ITO, WARD -2(5), RANCHI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 188/RAN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं.य/

Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(vv)

section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act as applicable for the assessment year under consideration is reproduced as under:- “Where an individual or a Hindu undivided family receives, in any previous year, from any person or persons on or after the 1st day of October, 2009. (a)………………… (b)any immovable property, without consideration, the stamp duty value of which

ITO.WD-2(1), RANCHI vs. SHRI NAND BIHARI SHRIVASTAVA, RANCHI

In the result, the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 197/RAN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Respondent: Shri Chandan Das, JCIT/ld.DR
Section 144Section 54Section 56(2)(vii)

gain, as he has ignored provisions of section 56(2)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) also ignored the law points involved in the case of difference of consideration value and value taken for stamp duty. 4. Ground no. 1 and 2 relate to relief of Rs. 69,96,455/­ on account of capital

SRI BINOY KUMAR SINGH, ,DALTONGANJ vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, RANCHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 195/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 Jul 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2015-16

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

56(2)(vii) never formed subject- matter of assessee’s grounds in the lower appellate proceedings nor any such issue had arisen in the assessment order. This tribunal’s co-ordinate bench’s decision in Bikram Singh vs.DCIT, Circle-15(1), New Delhi in ITA No. 3522/Del/2013 decided on 13.04.2016 reverses similar addition as under:- “11. We have perused

TATA CUMMINS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1-JAMSHEDPUR AND THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI, JAMSHEDPUR

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

ITA 430/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi12 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaytata Cummins Private Limited, D.C.I.T., Cummins India Office, Tower-A, 7Th Circle-1, Vs. Floor, Survey No. 21, Balewadi, Pune, Jamshedpur. Maharashtra. Pan No. Aaact 6353 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

56 (Income from other Sources). Even Income arising from International Transaction between A.E. must satisfy the test of Income under the Act and must find its home in one of the above heads i.e. charging provisions..... iv. Dana Corporation [2010] 186 Taxman 187 (MR) The relevant extracts are as follows: "8. ............ It must be noted that Section

KULDIP SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 180/RAN/2025[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.180/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kuldip Singh…………………….……….……...................……….……Appellant The Avenue Vishnupuri Marg, Upper Burdwan Compound, Lalpur, Ranchi- 834001. [Pan: Agjps6921P] Vs. Dcit/Acit, Circle-1, Ranchi…...…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 10, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 06.03.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. The addition was made on the allegation that the assessee purchased land measuring 0.67 acre for a consideration of ₹42,30,000, whereas the stamp duty valuation was ₹1,20,02,000, and the difference of ₹77,72,000 was treated as income. 3. Before the learned CIT(A), the assessee raised specific