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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 54Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi138Chandigarh84Indore82Ahmedabad65Surat64Pune63Bangalore55Jaipur54Hyderabad43Mumbai35Chennai28Raipur18Rajkot13Agra13Amritsar11Karnataka10Kolkata10Nagpur7Jodhpur7SC6Patna5Jabalpur5Visakhapatnam4Cochin4Dehradun4Telangana3Cuttack2Calcutta1Allahabad1Varanasi1Lucknow1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 54B16Section 54F5Section 2(14)(iii)4Section 2(14)4Section 1483Section 2633Section 1473Long Term Capital Gains3Deduction3

SANNIDHI SRI RAMACHANDRA MURTHY (HUF),RAJAHMUNDRY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 230/VIZ/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 230/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sannidhi Sriramachandra Murthy (Huf) V. The Assistant Commissioner Of D.No. 42-10-30/31 Income Tax, Circle-1 Income Tax Office, Aayakar Bhavan Sree Ramachandra Murthy Nilayam Veerabhadrapuram Mangalavarapu Peta Rajahmundry-533105 Rajahmundry – 533101 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaxhs4350L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व / Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasaai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 45(2)Section 54BSection 54ESection 54F

54B and 54F of the Act could not be denied. In response, assessee vide reply dated 12.03.2024 submitted that the capital gains on the conversion of the capital asset into stock-in-trade was realised during the assessment year 2013-14. As per the provisions of section

Exemption3
Section 250(6)2
Addition to Income2

T.NAGI REDDY (HUF),,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 109/VIZ/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blet. Nagireddy (Huf), Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, D.No. 17-40-23, Visakhapatnam. Pedagantyada, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaaht 4815 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ch. Sajeev – Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54B

section 54B of the Act. Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee has contended that the land was situated at 8 km. away from Visakhapatnam Municipality limits, as such property transferred was not a capital asset and it would not attract the capital gains

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI JASTI SRIDHAR BABU, KESARAPALLI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 604/VIZ/2019[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Apr 2021AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonawal, CIT DR
Section 10(1)Section 2(14)Section 250(6)Section 3Section 54BSection 54F

gain of Rs. 3,50,00,300/- and added to the income of the Assessee . The AO also disallowed deduction of Rs. 92,79,935/- as claimed u/sec. 54B of the Act and to the tune of Rs. 45,000/- claimed exempted qua agricultural income by the Assessee. 3. Against the aforesaid disallowances, the Assessee preferred the first appeal before

NALINI BANDI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 46/VIZ/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri I.Kama Sastry, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.Rama Krishna, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250(6)Section 54B

capital gain computation was not done while preparing the ITR for the relevant A.Y. 2008-09, however, disclosure was made in the statement of the computation of income. It was further claimed before the AO that the Assessee has complied with all the conditions mentioned in section 54B