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”+ Section 69Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai500Delhi239Jaipur137Pune42Bangalore38Indore36Chennai33Kolkata33Chandigarh30Ahmedabad23Surat19Guwahati17Nagpur10Jodhpur7Lucknow7Rajkot5Hyderabad5Amritsar4Visakhapatnam3Cochin3Ranchi2Agra2Patna1Raipur1Dehradun1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 69C6Section 685Capital Gains3Unexplained Cash Credit3Section 1482Deduction2Addition to Income2

A HARSHITA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, MA filed assessee is allowed and the appeals of

ITA 97/VIZ/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 68Section 69C

section 69C also does not arise as the commission expenditure itself does not exist. The Ld. AR further submitted that since the Tribunal has found that the assessee was not involved in obtaining accommodation entries and having deleted the addition U/s. 68 of the Act, the addition made U/s. 69C of the Act by the Ld. AO treating the commission

A.AMMAJI ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, MA filed assessee is allowed and the appeals of

ITA 98/VIZ/2020[2014-15]Status: Disposed
ITAT Visakhapatnam
15 Dec 2023
AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 68Section 69C

section 69C also does not arise as the commission expenditure itself does not exist. The Ld. AR further submitted that since the Tribunal has found that the assessee was not involved in obtaining accommodation entries and having deleted the addition U/s. 68 of the Act, the addition made U/s. 69C of the Act by the Ld. AO treating the commission

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DUVVURU REKHA REDDY, KURMANNAPALEM

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.450/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Vs. Income Tax Officer –Ward– 2(5) Duvvuru Rekha Reddy 2Nd Floor, Infinity Towers Flat No. 402, Vizag Profile Towers Sankaramatam Road Kurmannapalem Visakhapatnam - 530016 Visakhapatnam -530046 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afdpr3780C] सी.ओ सं. / C.O. No. 17/Viz/2024 [आयकरअपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.No.450/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18)] Vs. Income Tax Officer –Ward– 2(5) Duvvuru Rekha Reddy 2Nd Floor, Infinity Towers Flat No. 402, Vizag Profile Towers Sankaramatam Road Kurmannapalem Visakhapatnam - 530016 Visakhapatnam - 530046 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Afdpr3780C]

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Capital Gain of Rs.1,94,13,599/- which is disclosed in the return of income filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. In support of the above submissions, assessee filed relevant evidence in support Page. No 3 I.T.A.No.450/VIZ/2024 C.O. No. 17/VIZ/2024 Duvvuru Rekha Reddy of the funds mobilised for investment in the Company Steel Exchange