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.

50 results for “capital gains”+ Section 80Jclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai70Bangalore50Raipur47Delhi35Chennai20Guwahati11Kolkata10Ahmedabad8Ranchi6SC5Telangana4Hyderabad4Chandigarh3Rajkot3Karnataka3Varanasi3Jodhpur3Jaipur2Indore2Surat2Nagpur1Visakhapatnam1

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(a)101Section 80P56Deduction44Section 143(3)26Section 8025Section 26320Section 80P(2)(d)19Section 80P(4)17Section 10A17

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. SHRI. PRASHANTH PRAKASH, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed, while the Cross Objection by assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 864/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jun 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, Jt. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 54F

section 2(42A) of the Act. The law is well settled that when there is a transfer of capital asset being land together with building and where the land is held for a period of more than 36 months and the building held for less than 36 months, the capital gain on land and building has to be bifurcated

PRASHANTH PRAKASH,BANGALORE vs. ADDL.C.I,.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 50 · Page 1 of 3

Disallowance12
Exemption12
Addition to Income11
ITA 573/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Mar 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, Jt. CIT(DR)
Section 48

section 2(42A) of the Act. The law is well settled that when there is a transfer of capital asset being land together with building and where the land is held for a period of more than 36 months and the building held for less than 36 months, the capital gain on land and building

M/S FABSUN ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1396/BANG/2013[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Feb 2015AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 1998-99

For Appellant: Shri Ian Lewis, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, Jt. CIT(DR)
Section 45Section 54G

capital gains arising from the sale of the assets at the old place from where an industrial undertaking is shifted in terms of the scheme of the Central Government announced for this purpose. In order to be eligible for the concession specified conditions have to be fulfilled. Though the expression industrial ‘undertaking’ has not been defined in this chapter

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

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S COFFEEDAY GLOBAL LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 3040/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3040 & 3041/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Coffee Day Global Limited, Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(3), No.23/2, Coffeeday Square, 3Rd Floor, C.R. Building, Vittal Mallya Road, Queen’S Road, Bengaluru-560 001. Bengaluru-560 001. [Pan: Aabca 5291P]

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 43A

capital investment in a partnership firm cannot be considered on par with investment in equity and therefore. such investment cannot be considered as for the purpose of earning exempt income, all the more so for the reason that the profits of the partnership firm are taxed in the hands of the firm and hence, not taxed in the hands

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S COFFEEDAY GLOBAL LIMITED , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 3041/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3040 & 3041/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Coffee Day Global Limited, Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(3), No.23/2, Coffeeday Square, 3Rd Floor, C.R. Building, Vittal Mallya Road, Queen’S Road, Bengaluru-560 001. Bengaluru-560 001. [Pan: Aabca 5291P]

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 43A

capital investment in a partnership firm cannot be considered on par with investment in equity and therefore. such investment cannot be considered as for the purpose of earning exempt income, all the more so for the reason that the profits of the partnership firm are taxed in the hands of the firm and hence, not taxed in the hands

IBM GLOBAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 3464/BANG/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2000-2001

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 10A(2)Section 10A(2)(ia)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

80J in relation to the profits and where such sale proceeds are credited to gains of the industrial undertaking; and a separate account maintained for the (iv) in computing the depreciation allowance purpose by the assessee with any bank under section 32, the written down value of outside India with the approval of the any asset used for the purposes

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LTD.,, BANGALORE

ITA 609/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2009-10

Section 143(3)

capital expenditure incurred by the assessee. In reply, the learned counsel pointed out that the expenditure by way of technical know- how was capitalized and it was not claimed as revenue expenditure. Therefore, there was also no reason to disallow depreciation on such capitalized amount as the aforesaid provision does not deal with deduction of depreciation. Having considered arguments from

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LTD.,, BANGALORE

ITA 467/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.99/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2009-10

Section 143(3)

capital expenditure incurred by the assessee. In reply, the learned counsel pointed out that the expenditure by way of technical know- how was capitalized and it was not claimed as revenue expenditure. Therefore, there was also no reason to disallow depreciation on such capitalized amount as the aforesaid provision does not deal with deduction of depreciation. Having considered arguments from

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. SUTURES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of revenue is allowed

ITA 486/BANG/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri N. Balakrishnan, Addl. CIT (D.R)For Respondent: Shri A. Shankar, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 80I

gain of business before computing relief u/s 80HHC. Thus, the issue at hand has been settled…………” (ii) The Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi Bench ‘C’ (Special Bench) in the case of ACIT v. Hindustan Mint & Agro Products (P) Ltd. referred supra, was emphatic in its wisdom in concurring with the decision of the Chennai Special Bench in the case of ACIT

VIJAYA BANK EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(2)(3), BANGALORE

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1524/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Years 2022-23 Appellant / Assessee Vijaya Bank Employees Cooperative Credit Society, R No 1, 67, Ii Floor, K H Road Shantinagar Bangalore 560027 Karnataka Respondent The Income Tax Officer, Ward 7 (2) (3) Bmtc Building Koramangala Bangalore 560095 Pan Aaaav4696A For Appellant Shri Prasanna N Uralal Advocate For Respondent Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate Date Of Hearing 04-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement 15-12-2025 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section-80J. In our view, since the expression of wider import, namely, "attributable to'', has been used, the legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity.' 8. Therefore, the word "attributable to" is certainly wider in import than the expression "derived from". Whenever the legislature wanted

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1, HOSPET vs. GAYATRI PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITHA, HOSPET, HOSPET

ITA 1078/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Balram R Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

gains derived from the conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity. In this connection, it may be pointed out that whenever the legislature wanted to give a restricted meaning in the manner suggested by the learned Solicitor General, it has used the expression "derived from", as for instance, in Section 80J. In our view, since the expression

THE KARNATAKA STATE COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT BANK LIMITED ,BANGLAORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BENGALURU

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1821/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Apr 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Bhardwaj Sheshadri, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Subramanian, JCIT (DR)
Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

section 80J. In our view, since the expression of wider import, namely, "attributable to", has been used, the legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity.” (emphasis supplied) 17.3 Therefore, the word "attributable to" is certainly wider in import than the expression "derived from". Whenever the legislature

M/S MILLENIUM CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is allowed

ITA 1360/BANG/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2015AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. K. Shankar Prasad, JCIT (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

section 80J. In our view, since the expression of wider import, namely, ‘attributable to’, has been used, the legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity.” 8. Therefore, the word ‘attributable to’ is certainly wider in import than the expression ‘derived from’. Whenever the legislature wanted

JAMMANAHALLY PRATHAMIKA KRISHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA,BALLUPET vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, HASSAN

In the result ITA No. 192/Bangalore/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 341/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 80

section-80J. In our view, since the expression of wider import, namely, "attributable to'', has been used, the legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity.' 8. Therefore, the word "attributable to" is certainly wider in import than the expression "derived from". Whenever the legislature wanted

JAMMANAHALLY PRATHAMIKA KRISHI PATTINA SAHAKARA SANGHA,SAKLESHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, HASSAN

In the result ITA No. 192/Bangalore/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 192/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 80

section-80J. In our view, since the expression of wider import, namely, "attributable to'', has been used, the legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity.' 8. Therefore, the word "attributable to" is certainly wider in import than the expression "derived from". Whenever the legislature wanted

M/S. THOTA UTHPANNAGALA MARATA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA,DAVANAGERE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1), DAVANAGERE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 1290/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S.V Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT
Section 57Section 80

section-80J. In our view, since the expression of wider import, namely, "attributable to", has been used. the legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity.' 8. Therefore. the word "attributable to" is certainly wider in import than the expression "derived from" Whenever the legislature wanted

PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ,KODAGU vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU -3, BENGALURU

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1073/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 142Section 143Section 263Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

section-80J. In our view, since the expression of wider import, namely, "attributable to'', has been used, the legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity.' 8. Therefore, the word "attributable to" is certainly wider in import than the expression "derived from". Whenever the legislature wanted

MAHILANIDHI SOUHARDA LIMITED ,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), MANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for the assessment

ITA 1526/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, CA
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

section-80J. In our view, since the expression of wider import, namely, "attributable to", has been used, the legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity.' 8. Therefore, the word "attributable to" is certainly wider in import than the expression "derived from". Whenever the legislature wanted