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.

3 results for “capital gains”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai954Delhi753Ahmedabad295Jaipur261Chennai236Hyderabad186Pune154Bangalore153Chandigarh133Kolkata116Indore91Raipur83Surat72Nagpur59Visakhapatnam53Lucknow51Rajkot35Cochin27Patna24Ranchi24Cuttack23Agra22Dehradun17Amritsar17Jodhpur14Guwahati13Allahabad5Jabalpur4Varanasi3Panaji3

Key Topics

Section 285Section 271(1)(c)3Section 143(1)3Section 36(1)(va)3Section 2(24)(x)3Addition to Income3Section 2742Section 562Penalty2

GORAKH NATH YADAV,VARANASI vs. ITA, WARD - 3(4), VARANASI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 26/VNS/2023[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi16 Oct 2023AY 2004-2005
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

penalty of Rs.3,50,162/- on account of addition made under the head long term capital gain of Rs.16,10,438/-. Before

M/S JAI AMBE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES,VARANASI vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(1), VARANASI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 19/VNS/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi05 Jun 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2019-2020 M/S Jai Ambe Agricultural The Dcit, Industries, Plot No. 211, V. Circle-2(1), Aayakar Bhawan, M A Marg, Churamanpur, Varanasi- Varanasi-221002,U.P. 221108,U.P. ( The Adi, Cpc, Bengaluru) Pan:Aahfj9428N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R.K.N. Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 14Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40(1)Section 40(2)Section 56

penalty for defaults, addition of Rs. 1,28,680-00 in the guise of sec. 36(1)va still "res-integra", amounts to double jeopardy. 5. Because, responsibility to pay both part of the contributions are by Para - 30(1) EPF Scheme as well as sec. 40(1) of the ESI Act is over the Employer which

M/S RAJENDRA PRASAD SRIVASTAVA,AZAMGARH vs. ACIT, RANGE - AZAMGARH, AZAMGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 164/VNS/2019[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi07 Feb 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Rajendra Prasad Srivastava, Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Sarfuddinpur, Near Railway Tax, Range-Azamgarh Station, Azamgarh-276001 Pan-Aakfr2986A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh.Hari N. Singh Bisen, C.A. Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.02.2023

For Appellant: Sh.Hari N. Singh Bisen, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1) (c) is initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.” 7. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the CIT(A) and contended that the AO has assessed the interest on FDR as income from other sources instead of part of net profit. It was contended that the assessee is a civil contractor