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.

90 results for “capital gains”+ Section 35(2)(ab)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi184Mumbai176Jaipur94Chennai90Bangalore83Raipur64Cochin62Hyderabad40Chandigarh37Ahmedabad32Nagpur25Indore17Kolkata15Pune14Amritsar11Visakhapatnam9Lucknow9Rajkot5Ranchi4Agra3Patna3Cuttack2Jabalpur1Surat1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 153C59Section 14850Addition to Income44Section 13238Section 153A36Section 143(3)35Section 25029Section 270A28Section 14722

AADARSH SURANA, CHENNAI,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

ITA 1840/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri. R.Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 47Section 68

ab initio.\n47. Per contra, the Ld.DR submitted that even if there was any deviation by\nthe AO from the CBDT instructions governing limited scrutiny, such deviation\nwould render the AO liable for administrative or disciplinary action, but would\nnot vitiates the assessment order per se. The Ld.DR further submitted that the\naddition of Rs.4,30,62,000/- made u/s.69

Showing 1–20 of 90 · Page 1 of 5

Reopening of Assessment21
Reassessment20
Disallowance19

SUNDARAM FASTENERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 3236/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3236/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. M/S.Sundram Fasteners Ltd., The Dcit, 98-A, 7Th Floor, Corporate Circle-6(2), Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. [Pan: Aaacs 8779 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vikaram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

AB) reads as under: Expenditure on scientific research. 35. (2AB)(1) Where a company engaged in the business of bio- technology or in any business of manufacture or production of any article or thing, not being an article or thing specified in the list of the Eleventh Schedule incurs any expenditure on scientific research (not being expenditure in the nature

ALTHI VENKATA NARENDRA RAJU,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1247/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 153(3)

Capital Gain for the AY 2014-15.\n\n4.0\nThe Ld. Counsel for the assessee has vehemently argued that the\norder dated 28.09.2021 passed by the Ld.AO is barred by limitation within\nthe meanings of section 153(3). It has been argued inviting reference to\nthe statutory provisions of section 153(3) as well as judicial precedents\ncovering the subject

ARVIND NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2270/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Respondent: Mr.M. Murali, CIT
Section 131Section 132

ab-initio void. The second legal challenge of the assessee is inter alia to the validity of the addition(s) made in the impugned unabated AYs u/s 153C/143(3) of the Act sans any incriminating material found in the course of search from the premises of the searched person. The third legal challenge raised

ARVIND NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), CHENNAI

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2271/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Respondent: Mr.M. Murali, CIT
Section 131Section 132

ab-initio void. The second legal challenge of the assessee is inter alia to the validity of the addition(s) made in the impugned unabated AYs u/s 153C/143(3) of the Act sans any incriminating material found in the course of search from the premises of the searched person. The third legal challenge raised

ARVIND NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1),, CHENNAI

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2273/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Respondent: Mr.M. Murali, CIT
Section 131Section 132

ab-initio void. The second legal challenge of the assessee is inter alia to the validity of the addition(s) made in the impugned unabated AYs u/s 153C/143(3) of the Act sans any incriminating material found in the course of search from the premises of the searched person. The third legal challenge raised

ARVIND NANDAGOPAL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-3(1),, CHENNAI

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2272/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Respondent: Mr.M. Murali, CIT
Section 131Section 132

ab-initio void. The second legal challenge of the assessee is inter alia to the validity of the addition(s) made in the impugned unabated AYs u/s 153C/143(3) of the Act sans any incriminating material found in the course of search from the premises of the searched person. The third legal challenge raised

INCOME TAX OFFICER, COIMBATORE vs. DAMAYANTI RAMACHANDRAN, GN MILLS POST, COIMBATORE

In the result, both the appeals of revenue for the A

ITA 103/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Chny/2025, ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Mr.Ketan K. Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Mr.Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 45(4)

35%-0.01%(-34.90%) Mrs.Damayanthi Ramachandran are the sole beneficiaries) ITA No.103/Chny/2025 & CO No.19/Chny/2025 (AY-2015-16) ITA No.149/Chny/2025 & CO No.20/Chny/2025 (AY-2016-17) Damayanti Ramachandran :: 23 :: - Also a revaluation of firm Texmo Industries was done and the increase in valuation of Rs.712.27 crores was treated as valuation of goodwill. Business Revaluation / valuation of goodwill of Tl as on 31.03.2012 Revaluation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MULLIAMBAL RATHNASAMY PITCHAKANNU ERAAVANAN, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 1810/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1810/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 74/Chny/2024 [In Ita No. 1810/Chny/2024] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Arvind E & Mrs. Baskaravalli Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), (Legal Heir Of Late Shri Mrp Investigation Building, Eraavanan), No. 4, Rice Mill Road, Chennai. Erimedu, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore 641 045. [Pan:Aaape5554D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Dr Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit Drew Our Attention To Additional Grounds Raised By The Appellant – Revenue. He Submits That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erroneous On Facts Of The Case

For Appellant: Shri S. Sundar Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate
Section 159Section 2

ab initio and prayed to set aside the same. The ld. DR drew our attention to the relief claimed and prayed to restore the order of the Assessing Officer. 3. The ld. AR Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate submits that the instant additional grounds are being raised against the jurisdictional issue by the Appellant – Revenue. He submits that the Revenue erroneously

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assesse and Revenue are dealt as under:-

ITA 495/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Insurance Company Limited, Large Tax Payer Unit, Vishranthi Melaram Towers, Chennai. No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.491, 492, 493, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Large Tax Payer Unit, Insurance Company Limited, Chennai. Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sanjay For Ms V.Pushpa, Sr.Standing Counsel For It Dept. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2025

For Respondent: Shri A.Sanjay for Ms V.Pushpa
Section 143(3)Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view that the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed. We therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and allow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee. Consequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10 orders

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assesse and Revenue are dealt as under:-

ITA 92/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Insurance Company Limited, Large Tax Payer Unit, Vishranthi Melaram Towers, Chennai. No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.491, 492, 493, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Large Tax Payer Unit, Insurance Company Limited, Chennai. Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sanjay For Ms V.Pushpa, Sr.Standing Counsel For It Dept. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2025

For Respondent: Shri A.Sanjay for Ms V.Pushpa
Section 143(3)Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view that the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed. We therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and allow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee. Consequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10 orders

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assesse and Revenue are dealt as under:-

ITA 494/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 & 93 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Insurance Company Limited, Large Tax Payer Unit, Vishranthi Melaram Towers, Chennai. No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.491, 492, 493, 494, 495 & 496 /Chny/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S.Royal Sundaram General Large Tax Payer Unit, Insurance Company Limited, Chennai. Vishranthi Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(Omr), Karapakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Aabcr7106G] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A.Sanjay For Ms V.Pushpa, Sr.Standing Counsel For It Dept. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.01.2025

For Respondent: Shri A.Sanjay for Ms V.Pushpa
Section 143(3)Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view that the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed. We therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and allow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee. Consequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10 orders

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

ITA 87/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2009-10
Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee.\nConsequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10\norders

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

ITA 86/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2008-09
Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee.\nConsequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10\norders

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

ITA 493/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.Sanjay for Ms V.Pushpa
Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee.\nConsequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10\norders

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

ITA 496/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2014-15
Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee.\nConsequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10\norders

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

ITA 90/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee.\nConsequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10\norders

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

ITA 492/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2010-11
Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee.\nConsequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10\norders

DCIT LTU 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

ITA 491/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2008-09
Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee.\nConsequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10\norders

ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, LTU, CHENNAI

ITA 93/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2025AY 2014-15
Section 148

ab initio. Accordingly, we are of the view\nthat the proceedings u/s 148 are bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\nWe therefore quash the proceedings u/s 148 as being bad in law and\nallow the grounds of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee.\nConsequently the assessment orders for AY-2008-09 and 2009-10\norders