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 “house property”+ Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,801Delhi2,048Bangalore954Chennai815Kolkata466Jaipur402Hyderabad330Ahmedabad318Pune250Karnataka227Surat212Chandigarh187Indore130Cochin125Raipur78Nagpur73Calcutta56Visakhapatnam50Telangana49Rajkot45Lucknow44Patna36SC35Amritsar28Agra27Cuttack27Guwahati26Jabalpur15Dehradun14Kerala11Jodhpur10Allahabad9Varanasi8Ranchi8Rajasthan4Panaji3Andhra Pradesh2Himachal Pradesh1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1Orissa1Gauhati1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 1489Section 1477Section 143(2)7Section 54F7Addition to Income5Section 10(38)4Section 143(3)4Long Term Capital Gains4Section 234A

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

house property), 28 (Profits and gains of business), 45 (Capital gain) and 56 (Income from other Sources). Even Income arising

SRI AJAY KUMAR MURARKA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 202/RAN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi13 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

Shri Akshay Ringasia, FCA
3
Section 2503
Penny Stock3
Exemption3
For Appellant:
For Respondent: Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

house property, capital gain and other sources. Original return was filed on 14.09.2011, reporting a total income of Rs.19,36,530/-. Subsequently

SRI AJAY KUMAR MURARKA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1(1),, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 56/RAN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi13 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Ringasia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

house property, capital gain and other sources. Original return was filed on 14.09.2011, reporting a total income of Rs.19,36,530/-. Subsequently

SRI RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR SUKESH KUMAR,RANCHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 194/RAN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Manish Boradi.T.A. No.194/Ran/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sri Ramakrishnan Nair Sukesh Kumar.…...…..................……...…..….. Appellant Quarter No.R I/1, Birla Institute Of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi-835215. [Pan: Abtpk1985G] Vs. Acit, Circle-3, Ranchi…..……………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Ku. Koley , Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 23, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 07, 2022 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.02.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

capital gains is admissible. 4. In this case, since the assessee had made investment/purchased an under- construction house, therefore, in our view, the amount spent on the under-construction house within the three years from the date of sale of immovable property

VISHWANATH PRASAD VISHWKARMA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(4), JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 303/RAN/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: BEFORES/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Devasis Sannigrahi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Khub Chand Pandya, Sr hri Khub Chand Pandya, Sr DR

house property on 27.7.2012. It was the submission that the sale consideration of the property was Rs.3,20,00,000/-. It was the submission that the assessee had filed his return of income declaring long term capital gains

DR. SANJAY KUMAR,RANCHI vs. PR. CIT, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 29/RAN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

property used for residence and not for profit on sale of piece of land. Finally the Ld. PCIT revised the order by setting aside the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 12.10.2017 with the direction to frame the assessment de novo after making fresh enquiries regarding genuineness of demand claimed from long term capital gain

BIJOY KUMAR AGARWAL,RANCHI vs. ACIT/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 310/RAN/2025[11-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarmaandshri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountantmember

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

house property. The assessee also declared Long-Term Capital Gain of ₹30,55,833, claimed as exempt, arising from sale

SUDHIR KUMAR JHA,BOKARO STEEL CITY vs. ACIT OR DCIT, CIRCLE-3, BOKARO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 131/RAN/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi24 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Jha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. DR
Section 250

house in Bokaro before retirement in 2017\nThe amount given shall be accounted for at the time of division of property between the\nbrothers whenever it takes place in future.\nFrom the financial year 2016-17, my brother Sudhir Kumar Jha also started looking after\nthe agriculture activities on some portion of land with our mutual understanding, in view