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.

3 results for “capital gains”+ Section 40A(9)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai399Delhi393Bangalore128Ahmedabad104Kolkata98Chennai92Jaipur77Hyderabad69Raipur39Pune37Chandigarh37Cochin33Indore30Visakhapatnam28Surat12Cuttack12Lucknow10Rajkot8Amritsar7Karnataka6SC5Guwahati4Calcutta3Patna2Jabalpur1Allahabad1Dehradun1Agra1Jodhpur1Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 260A4Section 143(3)4Section 80H4Section 403Disallowance3Section 1952Section 115J2Section 14A2Capital Gains2Deduction

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

capital gains, Mr. Rai contended that the learned Tribunal ought not to have interfered with the order passed by the first appellate authority in Page 7 of 13 as much as the assessee did not challenge the valuation made by the DVO before the first appellate authority. 14. Mr. Khaitan, learned Senior counsel appearing for the assessee respondent seriously disputed

2

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA vs. M/S ITC LTD

ITAT/89/2025HC Calcutta21 Jul 2025

Bench: The Learned Tribunal – One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Which Have Been Disposed Of By A Common Order, Impugned In This Appeal. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration :

For Appellant: Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate
Section 14ASection 260ASection 37(1)Section 40a

gain resulting on other receivable/payables treating the same to be notional in nature? (d) Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,49,54,059/- by holding that the same being liquidated damages received from the suppliers on account of delayed installation of machineries and delayed construction of 3 building was a capital

C.I.T CENTRAL I vs. J. K. INDUSTRIES LTD.

ITA/268/2005HC Calcutta07 Feb 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

Section 115JSection 260ASection 40A(9)Section 80H

40A(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in that view deleting the disallowance of Rs.17,05,646/- ? 2 ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case ITAT erred in law in upholding CIT(A)’s decision in directing the AO to deduct the amount of Rs.20,45,07,768/- from the net profit to arrive