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.

2 results for “capital gains”+ Section 54F(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai434Delhi405Chennai269Bangalore243Ahmedabad127Hyderabad119Jaipur94Kolkata73Pune72Indore71Surat45Visakhapatnam35Karnataka31Chandigarh29Cochin24Nagpur22Patna21Raipur18Agra15Rajkot11Jabalpur11Jodhpur9Lucknow9Dehradun8Amritsar7Cuttack7Telangana7SC5Ranchi5Kerala3Allahabad2Guwahati2Calcutta2Varanasi2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 54F18Capital Gains2Long Term Capital Gains2Disallowance2

SHAMIMUL FATIMA,GORAKHPUR vs. ACIT, RANGE - 02, GORAKHPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 102/VNS/2019[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi22 Nov 2023AY 2013-2014
For Appellant: Shri. Ashish BansalFor Respondent: Shri. A. K. Singh
Section 54(2)Section 54BSection 54F

1,40,30,177/-. Which was claim as exemption u/s 54B of ₹ 53,50,300/- and ₹ 93,94,781/- u/s 54F respectively. The Ld. AO noted that flat in which investment was claimed was actually booked prior to two years from the date on which capital gain actual arose to the assessee. It was further noted by him that earlier

MIRZA ARIF BEG,GORAKHPUR vs. ACIT, RANGE - 1, GORAKHPUR

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

ITA 100/VNS/2019[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi26 May 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2014-15 Mirza Arif Beg, V. Commissioner Of Income Tax, H. No. 184-B, New Colony, New Range-1, Gorakhpur Beniganj Chowk, Jafra Bazar, Gorakhpur, U.P. Pan-Abxpb6421C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Subhash Chand, Advocate Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.05.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash Chand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 54F

1. Because the ACIT Range-1 has erred in law on facts in completing the assessment u/s 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 at income of Rs. 66,99,010/-. 2. Because the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal has erred in law of facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 20,95,910/- on account of long term capital