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.

6 results for “section 68”+ Section 72Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai29Chennai12Kolkata9Karnataka7Ahmedabad6Bangalore5Pune4Visakhapatnam3Delhi2SC2Jodhpur1Telangana1Jaipur1Rajkot1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1

Key Topics

Section 26Disallowance6Section 324Section 43(1)4Section 115J4Section 454Depreciation4Section 2502Section 143(3)2Section 391

RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA PVT. LTD., ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE INDIA LTD.,),HARYANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1184/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: FixedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nand Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 391Section 45

68,01,557 shares worth of Rs. 61,91,15,966/- of Sterling in return. I agree with the stand taken by the A.O and with due regards and respect to the order of Hon’ble High Court I hold that the said demerger was not as per the provisions of sec.2(19AA) of the Act for the reasons mentioned

2
Capital Gains2
Business Income2

JCIT(OSD), CIR-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. RECKITT BENCKISER HEALTHCARE (INDIA) LTD, HARYANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1225/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nand Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2Section 250Section 391Section 45

68,01,557 shares worth of Rs. 61,91,15,966/- of Sterling in return. I agree with the stand taken by the A.O and with due regards and respect to the order of Hon’ble High Court I hold that the said demerger was not as per the provisions of sec.2(19AA) of the Act for the reasons mentioned

BODAL CHEMICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1439/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 32Section 43(1)

68 of the paper book. All the facts were brought to the notice of the authorities below and no defect of whatsoever was pointed out. The learned AR also submitted that the amalgamating company were in possession of certain intangibles though the same were not recorded but the value of the same cannot be ignored while determining the purchase consideration

BODAL CHEMICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

ITA 2249/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 32Section 43(1)

68 of the paper book. All the facts were brought to the notice of the authorities below and no defect of whatsoever was pointed out. The learned AR also submitted that the amalgamating company were in possession of certain intangibles though the same were not recorded but the value of the same cannot be ignored while determining the purchase consideration

M/S. BODAL CHEMICAL LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADD.CIT.,RANGE-1,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 42/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 32Section 43(1)

68 of the paper book. All the facts were brought to the notice of the authorities below and no defect of whatsoever was pointed out. The learned AR also submitted that the amalgamating company were in possession of certain intangibles though the same were not recorded but the value of the same cannot be ignored while determining the purchase consideration

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. BODAL CHEMICAL LTD., AHMEDABAD

ITA 597/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 32Section 43(1)

68 of the paper book. All the facts were brought to the notice of the authorities below and no defect of whatsoever was pointed out. The learned AR also submitted that the amalgamating company were in possession of certain intangibles though the same were not recorded but the value of the same cannot be ignored while determining the purchase consideration