Search: capital gains

5 results for “capital gains”+ Section 43Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai74 Chennai29 Ahmedabad23 Delhi22 Hyderabad18 Pune12 Kolkata12 SC9 Bangalore8 Surat6 Amritsar5 Cochin3 Jaipur3 Chandigarh2 Rajkot2 Visakhapatnam1 Kerala1 Panaji1 Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 40A(3)7 Section 43B6 Disallowance5 Section 32(1)4 Section 684 Addition to Income4 Deduction3 Section 250(6)2 Section 402 Section 36(1)(iii)

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JAMMU vs. M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO,, JAMMU ( J&K)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as well as the appeal filed the Revenue Department is dismissed and Cross Objection also stands disposed off

ITA 27/ASR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita No.38(Asr)/2013 Assessment Year:2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. R.L. Gupta (Ld. Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. DR)

Section 142(1)Section 250(6)Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 68

gains of business shall be computed in accordance with the provisions contained in Sections 30 to 43D. Section 40 provides for certain disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are allowed generally under other sections. The computation under Section 29 is to be made under section 145 on the basis of the books regularly maintained by the asses

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JAMMU vs. M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO,, JAMMU ( J&K)

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, JAMMU vs. M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO,, JAMMU ( J&K)

M/S. CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION CO.,,JAMMU vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (HQRS), JAMMU

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMRITSAR. vs. SH. SHIV RAJ SINGH BAWA, AMRITSAR.

SH. VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL, PROP.,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFICER,WARD II(4), JALANDHAR