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.

3 results for “capital gains”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,434Delhi807Kolkata453Jaipur374Chennai326Ahmedabad294Bangalore212Surat207Hyderabad195Indore133Cochin111Pune110Chandigarh90Nagpur87Calcutta48Amritsar46Guwahati45Rajkot42Visakhapatnam35Lucknow32Panaji31Raipur31Agra21Cuttack20Jodhpur16Patna14Ranchi9Karnataka8Jabalpur7SC5Allahabad3Rajasthan3Telangana3Orissa2Varanasi2Dehradun2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 3022Section 3642Section 2012Addition to Income2

Commissioner of Income Tax-V, vs. Sri Vinod Krishna Conjeevaram,

The appeal is dismissed

ITTA/594/2013HC Telangana10 Dec 2013
Section 2(47)Section 260Section 45Section 45(4)Section 68

gains”. Similarly, the assessing authority noticed that one of the partners Sri Mahesh G. Shetty had introduced Rs.40 Lakhs as capital in the appellate firm. On going through the capital account of the partner, the assessing authority found that there was no mention about this amount. Therefore, the assessing authority treated this as an unexplained cash credit

The Commissioner of Income Tax -III vs. Sri T.C. Reddy

The appeal stands dismissed

ITTA/577/2011
HC Telangana
28 Feb 2012

capital of the company. This fact was brought to the notice of the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 29.12.2009. No satisfactory reply has been filed. It is therefore, disallowed from the revenue expenses claimed by the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s271(1)(c) r.w 274 of the Income-tax Act for concealment and furnishing of inaccurate particulars are initiated separately

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. Shri Raaj Kumar Jain

ITTA/147/2013HC Telangana28 Jun 2013
For Appellant: - Sri Yug Mohit Chaudhary assistedFor Respondent: - A.G.A., Sri Amit Mishra, Sri Gyan
Section 156(3)Section 201Section 302Section 363Section 364Section 366Section 376

Capital Case No.2667 of 2017. (ix) Vide order dated 8.2.2007, the accused was remanded to police custody till 22.2.2007 in case pertaining to victim 'D'. (x) Again on 22.2.2007 an application for police remand was moved by CBI IO MS Phartyal stating as under:- “That custodial interrogation of accused Surender Koli is necessary in the proper and just investigation