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.

6 results for “capital gains”+ Section 80Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai31Jaipur21Lucknow10Chandigarh10Delhi8Indore6Bangalore6Raipur5Chennai5Varanasi5Ahmedabad4Hyderabad4Kolkata4Pune3Nagpur3Patna1Jodhpur1Cochin1Surat1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 10A18Deduction6Section 545Section 80C4Section 45(2)4Section 80H4Addition to Income4Section 2503Section 303Section 80I

M/S. TATA ELXSI LIMITED., ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 927/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Kincha, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 10ASection 30Section 80ASection 80H

capital gains and income from other sources. Insofar as income under the head 'profits and gains of business or professions' is concerned, provisions thereto are contained in Sections 28 to 44DB of the Act. Section 28 specifies various incomes which shall be chargeable to income tax under this head. Thereafter, Section 29 provides that income referred to in Section

3
Exemption3
Capital Gains2

TATA ELXSI LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER INCOMER TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1152/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Tata Elxsi Ltd., The Deputy 126, Itpb Road, Commissioner Hoody, Of Income Tax, Whitefield, Circle – 7(1)(1), Bangalore – 560 048. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaact7872Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Padam Chand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT DR
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 250

capital gains and income from other sources. Insofar as income under the head 'profits and gains of business or professions' is concerned, provisions thereto are contained in Sections 28 to 44DB of the Act. Section 28 specifies various incomes which shall be chargeable to income tax under this head. Thereafter, Section 29 provides that income referred to in Section

M/S. TATA ELXSI LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 975/BANG/2023[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jan 2024AY 2020-2021
Section 10ASection 30Section 80ASection 80HSection 80I

capital gains and income from other\nsources. Insofar as income under the head 'profits and gains of business or\nprofessions' is concerned, provisions thereto are contained in Sections 28 to 44DB of\nthe Act. Section 28 specifies various incomes which shall be chargeable to income tax\nunder this head. Thereafter, Section 29 provides that income referred to in Section

MR. JAGANATH RAMACHANDRA JAMADAR ,BIDAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , BIDAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1067/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Jinita ChatterjeeFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 45(2)Section 80C

capital gains for the AY 2017-18 which is not in terms of section 45(2) of the Act. 8. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld AO had grossly erred in considering the cost of acquisition at Rs 3,00,000 and not Rs 3,35,000 as incurred by me towards

SYEDA BIBI SADIQA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 687/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri B. Chataraj, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, JCIT – DR
Section 24Section 250Section 54Section 69Section 80C

Section 54 as determined by the learned CIT Appeal needs to be corrected as under: The total sale proceeds of the apartments is 3,86,00,000 less: Cost of the new asset being 19,53,60,000. The deduction is restricted to the Sale Proceeds i.e 3,86,00,000. 3. The Learned CIT (A) had a misplaced idea

SENTHIL KUMAR THANGAVELU,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 371/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soudararajan Kassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri. Navaneeth N Kini, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 143(1)

capital gains, dividend and interest. Assessee was resident in India and filed return of income on 27.01.2022 with a total income of Rs.2,20,07,180/- and claimed foreign tax credit (FTC) of Rs.1,52,708/- under sections 90/91 of the Act. Due date for filing return of income was 31.12.2021. However, the return was filed on 27.01.2022 claiming deduction