Search: capital gains | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

7 results for “capital gains”+ Section 32Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai39 Delhi39 Bangalore22 Indore13 Kolkata9 SC8 Ahmedabad7 Pune7 Chennai6 Hyderabad6 Visakhapatnam3 Cochin2 Karnataka2 Guwahati1 Rajkot1 Cuttack1 Surat1

Key Topics

Disallowance7 Depreciation6 Addition to Income6 Section 54F5 Section 143(3)2 Short Term Capital Gains2 Business Income2 Survey u/s 133A2

SHRI DHANRAJ BAXIRAM CHOPRA,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(3)(4),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 407/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Ranjan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri L.F. Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 131Section 54Section 54F

32a[constructed, a residential house] (hereafter in this section referred to as the new asset), the capital gain shall be dealt

THE JT. CIT, RANGE-8, AHMEDABAD vs. VODAFONE SHARED SERVICES LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR SHARED SERVICES LTD.), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 162/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: Disposed

ITAT Ahmedabad

28 May 2019

AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadsl.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Adv. with Shri Bandish SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR

capital assets for the purposes of existing business and not for the purpose of expansion, would be allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court has after considering provisions of Explanation 8 to section 43(1) held that the said explanation is not relevant while determining deduction of interest expenditure under

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VODAFONE SHARED SERVICES LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR SHARED SERVICES LTD.),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 124/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadsl.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Adv. with Shri Bandish SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR

capital assets for the purposes of existing business and not for the purpose of expansion, would be allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court has after considering provisions of Explanation 8 to section 43(1) held that the said explanation is not relevant while determining deduction of interest expenditure under

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. VODAFONE SHARED SERVICES LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR SHARED SERVICES LTD.),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1468/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadsl.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Adv. with Shri Bandish SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR

capital assets for the purposes of existing business and not for the purpose of expansion, would be allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court has after considering provisions of Explanation 8 to section 43(1) held that the said explanation is not relevant while determining deduction of interest expenditure under

VODAFONE BUSINESS SERVICES LIMITED ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE SHARED SERVICES LIMITED),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1923/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadsl.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Adv. with Shri Bandish SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR

capital assets for the purposes of existing business and not for the purpose of expansion, would be allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court has after considering provisions of Explanation 8 to section 43(1) held that the said explanation is not relevant while determining deduction of interest expenditure under

ASIAN OILFIELD SERVICE LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 144/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble&

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar

capital gain." 3. The appeal was heard by the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal on 12.09.2017 and the order was pronounced on 08.12.2017 wherein part of the aforesaid grounds of appeal were decided against the assessee. However, since some of the grounds were left to be adjudicated in the said order, the assessee moved a Miscellaneous Application before

ASIAN OILFIELD SERVICES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the A

ITA 1266/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble&

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar

capital gain." 3. The appeal was heard by the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal on 12.09.2017 and the order was pronounced on 08.12.2017 wherein part of the aforesaid grounds of appeal were decided against the assessee. However, since some of the grounds were left to be adjudicated in the said order, the assessee moved a Miscellaneous Application before