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.

165 results for “capital gains”+ Section 10(25)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,908Delhi2,468Bangalore1,152Chennai766Ahmedabad615Kolkata570Jaipur528Hyderabad446Chandigarh287Pune287Surat271Karnataka257Indore215Cochin165Raipur160Visakhapatnam113Rajkot91Agra80Nagpur80Cuttack73Lucknow64Guwahati63Amritsar60Calcutta58SC53Telangana51Panaji49Ranchi23Jodhpur20Patna15Dehradun11Allahabad11Jabalpur10Kerala9Varanasi7Rajasthan6Andhra Pradesh2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Punjab & Haryana2Gauhati1Orissa1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

Key Topics

Section 25080Section 143(3)48Addition to Income27Section 37(1)26Section 26321Section 153C16Section 80G16Disallowance16Section 14A12Section 132

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 35/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 34/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

Showing 1–20 of 165 · Page 1 of 9

...
12
Capital Gains11
Limitation/Time-bar6

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 32/COCH/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 30/COCH/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 29/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 28/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 31/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 27/COCH/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 210/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 213/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

SMT.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O. vs. THE DCIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessesin ITA no

ITA 33/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 306/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 304/COCH/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SRI.JOSE THOMAS, ADOOR

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 238/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 308/COCH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 309/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

THE ACIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SMT.GRACY BABU, ADOOR P.O.

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 239/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SRI.JOSE THOMAS, ADOOR

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 55/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 305/COCH/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 310/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

III, Kochi dated 08/10/2018 and pertain to the assessment year 2009-10. 8.2 The assessees have raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The CIT(A) relied on the narration in pages 13,14 & 15 of the agreement dated 10/03/2009 to arrive at his conclusion, whereas he should have relied on page 16, para to where it was unambiguously stated