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.

2 results for “TDS”+ Long Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai764Delhi679Bangalore340Chennai268Kolkata135Jaipur89Ahmedabad89Cochin61Hyderabad45Chandigarh43Raipur38Indore31Pune18Surat18Visakhapatnam17Lucknow14Telangana10Cuttack9Karnataka7Guwahati6Amritsar6SC6Jabalpur4Jodhpur3Calcutta2Nagpur2Agra2Patna2Dehradun1Panaji1Rajkot1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)4Section 260A3Section 403Section 1952Section 94(7)2Capital Gains2Long Term Capital Gains2

JET AGE SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-III

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

ITA/79/2010HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 260ASection 94(7)

long term capital gains and short term capital gains which has been consistently accepted by the department. The assessee had therefore contended that for the assessment year under consideration, the same approach has to be maintained as the principle of consistency has to be applied. To support such contention, the decision in Radhasoami Satsang was relied upon. Though the tribunal

PRINCIPAL COMM OF INCOME TAX -4, KOLKATA vs. M/S LINDE INDIA LIMITED

ITAT/338/2016HC Calcutta05 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

For Respondent: Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 195Section 260ASection 40Section 5Section 50CSection 9

long term capital gain by adopting the fair market value as determined by the District Valuation Officer (for short “DVO”) and not as per the value determined by the Stamp Valuation Authorities. 7. Both the assessee and the revenue challenged the order dated March 30, 2011 passed by the first appellate authority by preferring separate appeals being ITA No. 806/Kol/2011