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.

22 results for “capital gains”+ Section 147clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,361Delhi1,574Chennai831Bangalore670Ahmedabad658Jaipur571Hyderabad471Kolkata428Pune335Indore261Chandigarh243Surat232Cochin189Karnataka154Visakhapatnam138Rajkot132Raipur130Nagpur119Agra68Lucknow67Amritsar66Calcutta60Panaji58Guwahati57Patna49Jabalpur35Cuttack27Jodhpur27Ranchi24Dehradun22SC20Allahabad15Telangana10Varanasi8Kerala4Rajasthan3Orissa2Andhra Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 14742Section 26337Section 143(3)27Section 14821Section 54B16Addition to Income11Section 153C9Capital Gains9Section 808Natural Justice

SH. CHANDRA KANT CHAHAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2813/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shrim. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Alok jain, Adv.; &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 50C

capital gains in the hands of the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to page Nos. 73 & 74 of the paper book submits that the assessment in the case of his brother, who was the co-owner of the property was completed under section 143(3) read with section 147

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

8
Deduction7
Section 80I6

SHRI ABHISHEK JOSHI,DEHRADUN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8/DDN/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshshri Abhishek Joshi, Vs. The Pr. Cit, C/O. Parimal Patet, Gk Patet & Dehradun Co, 14 Abhishek Tower, Subhash Road, Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Ajopj4300M Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Shri Somil Aggarwal, Adv Revenue By: Shri N. S. Jangpangi, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 26/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 15/09/2023

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N. S. jangpangi, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 54F

147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) dated 30.10.2018 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-1(1), Dehradun (hereinafter referred to as „ld. AO‟). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. PCIT has erred

OMWATI,DEHRADUN vs. PR.CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6853/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshsmt. Omwati Pr. Cit W/O Sh. Dariyav Singh Dehradun 171/1, Vasant Vihar, Vs. Dehradun Pan-Aanpw 6438K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 54B

section 147 to 151 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, Ld. Pr. CIT has erred in law in assuming jurisdiction and passing the impugned order u/s 263, is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. Since the above grounds are purely legal and does

SHRI AZAD ALI,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1572/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2007-08 Salim Ali, Vill. Ajabpur Kalan, Versus Income-Tax Officer, Post Ajabpur, Dehradun. Ward 2(1), Dehradun. Pan:Bapba5312H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Azad Ali, Vill. Ajabpur Kalan, Versus Income-Tax Officer, Post Ajabpur, Dehradun. Ward 2(1), Dehradun. Pan:Azvpa8477F (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shahzad Ali, Vill. Ajabpur Kalan, Versus Income-Tax Officer, Post Ajabpur, Dehradun. Ward 2(1), Dehradun. Pan:Azopa9077A (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessees By : Sh. Saurabh Gupta, Ca & Sh. Rishabh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. A.S. Rana, Cit/Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2023

For Respondent: Sh. A.S. Rana, CIT/DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153C

section 147 of the Act and ultimately, assessment orders were passed in respect of the co-owners of the land adding back various amounts of income on account of capital gain

SHRI SHAHAZAD ALI,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1574/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2007-08 Salim Ali, Vill. Ajabpur Kalan, Versus Income-Tax Officer, Post Ajabpur, Dehradun. Ward 2(1), Dehradun. Pan:Bapba5312H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Azad Ali, Vill. Ajabpur Kalan, Versus Income-Tax Officer, Post Ajabpur, Dehradun. Ward 2(1), Dehradun. Pan:Azvpa8477F (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shahzad Ali, Vill. Ajabpur Kalan, Versus Income-Tax Officer, Post Ajabpur, Dehradun. Ward 2(1), Dehradun. Pan:Azopa9077A (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessees By : Sh. Saurabh Gupta, Ca & Sh. Rishabh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. A.S. Rana, Cit/Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2023

For Respondent: Sh. A.S. Rana, CIT/DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153C

section 147 of the Act and ultimately, assessment orders were passed in respect of the co-owners of the land adding back various amounts of income on account of capital gain

SHRI SALIM ALI,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeals are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1570/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2007-08 Salim Ali, Vill. Ajabpur Kalan, Versus Income-Tax Officer, Post Ajabpur, Dehradun. Ward 2(1), Dehradun. Pan:Bapba5312H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Azad Ali, Vill. Ajabpur Kalan, Versus Income-Tax Officer, Post Ajabpur, Dehradun. Ward 2(1), Dehradun. Pan:Azvpa8477F (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shahzad Ali, Vill. Ajabpur Kalan, Versus Income-Tax Officer, Post Ajabpur, Dehradun. Ward 2(1), Dehradun. Pan:Azopa9077A (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessees By : Sh. Saurabh Gupta, Ca & Sh. Rishabh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. A.S. Rana, Cit/Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2023

For Respondent: Sh. A.S. Rana, CIT/DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153C

section 147 of the Act and ultimately, assessment orders were passed in respect of the co-owners of the land adding back various amounts of income on account of capital gain

KAMAL KISHORE JAISWAL,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 991/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2007-08 Kamal Kishore Jaiswal, Vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 23/25, Pritam Road, Central Circle, Dalanwala, Dehradun. Dehradun. (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acdpk1166C Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.04.2022 Order Per Yogesh Kumar U.S.: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-Iv, Kanpur Dated 16.01.2017. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, During The Year Under Consideration, The Assesse Had Sold Plot On Which Long Term Capital Gain (Ltcg)Of Rs.22,62,367/- Has Been Declared In His Return Of Income Filed Under Section 139 Of The Act. Out Of Ltcg, Rs.13,95,000/- Has Been Claimed Exempt Under Section 54F Of The Act, Which Was Invested In The Purchase Of Residential House Property Amounting To Rs.38,95,000/- At Pritam Road, Dehradun. A Loan Amount Of Rs.25 Lakh Had Been Availed From Hdfc Bank For Purchase Of The Said Property. The Balance Amount Of Rs.8,67,367/- As Capital Gain Was Offered To Tax. At The Time Of 2 Kamal Kishore Jaiswal Filing Return Under Section 153A Of The Act, The Assessee Claimed Entire Amount Of Long Term Capital Gain Exempt Under Section 54F Act, Therefore, A Show Cause Notice Has Been Issued To The Assesse & A Reply Has Been Submitted By The Assesse On 05.02.2013 In The Following Manner:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 147Section 153ASection 217(1)(c)Section 54F

capital gains and the cost of newly acquired house property and not with reference to the immediate source of the money for its acquisition besides proceedings u/s. 153A of the Act are aimed at making de novo assessments and are not akin to proceedings under Section 147

DARIYAV SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. PR. CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2029/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshsh. Sanjay Kumar Pr. Cit 170, Vasant Vihar-1 Dehradun Dehradun Vs. Pan-Akkpk 1007F (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Dariyav Singh Pr. Cit 28-Chakrata Road, Dehradun Dehradun Vs. Pan-Awkps 6026L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Mr. Sherey Jain, Advocates Respondent By Mr. N.S.Jangpangi, Cit-Dr

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 54B

147 of the Act on 15/03/2016. This assessment was sought to be revised by the Ld. PCIT by invoking revision jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act on the ground that the Ld. A.O. had not examined the claim of deduction u/s 54B of the Act made by the Ld. AO, thereby making reassessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

SANJAY KUMAR,DEHRADUN vs. PRCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2187/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshsh. Sanjay Kumar Pr. Cit 170, Vasant Vihar-1 Dehradun Dehradun Vs. Pan-Akkpk 1007F (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Dariyav Singh Pr. Cit 28-Chakrata Road, Dehradun Dehradun Vs. Pan-Awkps 6026L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Mr. Sherey Jain, Advocates Respondent By Mr. N.S.Jangpangi, Cit-Dr

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 54B

147 of the Act on 15/03/2016. This assessment was sought to be revised by the Ld. PCIT by invoking revision jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act on the ground that the Ld. A.O. had not examined the claim of deduction u/s 54B of the Act made by the Ld. AO, thereby making reassessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest

SH. IRSHAD ILAHI,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, W- 1(3), DEHRADUN

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

ITA 80/DDN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15 Irshad Ilahi, Income Tax Officer, 96 Colli Camp, Turner Road, Ward-1(3), Clement Town, Dehradun, Vs Dehradun Uttarkhand-248001 Pan-Acmpi0814J Appellant Respondent

Section 144Section 147Section 250

147 of the Act vide notice dated 18.10.2016. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed a return of income on 13.07.2017 declaring total income of Rs.2,99,580/-. The AO has given a list of dates in para no.2 on page-2 of the assessment order, where, out of nine occasions, there was no compliance on eight occasions

PRAKASHI UNIYAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, KOTDWAR

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

ITA 7145/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 May 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishia Y 2009-10 Appellant Respondent Ms Praksahi Uniyal The Income Tax Officer F-27 Thdc Colony Vs. Kotdwar Ajabpur Dehradun Pan : Ccxpp8494E ( Appellant ) ( Respondent )

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 54Section 69

capital gain of ₹ 5 97967/– was computed and it was added to the total income of the assessee. The total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 19,16,367/– vide order dated 13/3/2014 passed under section 143 (3) read with section 147

INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL RESEARCH INDIA SOCIETY,DEHRADUN vs. CIT(A), DEHRADUN

Appeal is allowed

ITA 45/DDN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Institute Of Clinical Research Vs. Commissioner Of Income India Society, Tax (Appeals), 1St Floor, Building No.1, Dehradun Treenetra Vihar, Near Kargt Chowk, Dehradun Pan :Aabai3710P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr

Section 11Section 12ASection 194Section 194JSection 2(15)Section 40

147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 3. Learned departmental representative vehemently argues during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have rightly disallowed the assessee’s expenditure claim for not having

DAVINDER KUMAR MAGO,PUNJABI BAGH vs. DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DDN, DEHRADUN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 17/DDN/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Davinder Kumar Mago Vs Dcit/Acit 12/1, Punjabi Bagh, Central Circle, External Punjabi Bagh, Dehradun New Delhi-110026 Uttarakhand Pan-Ajhpm9802A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. (Vc) Respondent By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 10.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.03.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order By Pr.Cit (Central), Kanpur At Meerut Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1861 (“The Act”) Dated 08.01.2026 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act.

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

147 of the Act. The reassessment order was passed wherein income declared by the assessee is accepted by AO. Thereafter, based on the information provided by the AO himself, Ld. PCIT initiated revision proceedings u/s 263 of the Act and the ld. PCIT hold the assessment order as erroneous and pre-judicial to the interest of the Revenue

LAKHME CHAND ASWANI ,HALDWANI vs. ITO, WARD- 1(2), HALDWANI

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

ITA 5224/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Through Video Conferencing At New Delhi] [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Lakhme Chand Aswani, Vs Ito, Gajajoli, Uttar Bareilly Road, Ward-1(2), Haldwani, Utarakhand. Haldwani. Pan-Agnpa7702N Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Prashant Kacker, Adv. Respondent By Smt.Mayank Prabha Tomar, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2022 Order

Section 115Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)Section 45

147 of the Act and a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 04.07.2016 to the assessee after obtaining the necessary approval from the Competent Authority. Thereafter, notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and duly served upon the assessee. In response to the statutory notices, the Ld.AR of the assessee attended the proceedings and filed

RAJESH MITTAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6/DDN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun29 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 06/Ddn/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Rajesh Mittal, Vs Income Tax Officer, C/O Mr. Sandeep Sapra, Adv., Ward-1(2)(2), C-763, New Friends Colony, Dehradun New Delhi-110025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abnpm2585Q Assessee By : Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Poonam Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2022 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Dehradun Dated 06.03.2019. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee:

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 44A

section 44AD on account of shares instead of assessing the same at Rs.56,147 under the head 'short term capital gain

ITO, WARD-1(3)(3), HARIDWAR vs. TOSH KUMAR JAIN, HARIDWAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3489/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun29 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Radhey Shyam, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

capital gains computed instead of the legal heir of the assessee. Hence, we hereby decline to interfere with the well reasoned and aptly outlined order of the ld. CIT(A). 5. Further, the Id. PCIT passed an order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 27.03.2021 revising the order passed u/s 148 dated 29.12.2017. From the reasons

SH. TOSH KUMAR JAIN,HARIDWAR vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 14/DDN/2021[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun29 Sept 2021AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Radhey Shyam, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

capital gains computed instead of the legal heir of the assessee. Hence, we hereby decline to interfere with the well reasoned and aptly outlined order of the ld. CIT(A). 5. Further, the Id. PCIT passed an order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 27.03.2021 revising the order passed u/s 148 dated 29.12.2017. From the reasons

ANITA NAND CHAHAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), DEHRADUN

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

ITA 70/DDN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 142Section 143Section 144Section 148

147 of the act on 17/11/2016 . 02 Briefly stated the facts fact shows that assessee along with nine other sold the land and her share of capital gain amounting to ₹ 1 597462. She did not file any return of income and therefore notice under section

VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA,RISHIKESH vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI, RISHIKESH

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 192/DDN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hig-8, Rishilok Colony, Ward-1(4)(1), Nehru Marg, Rishikesh, Rishikesh Uttarakhand Pan :Bcepg9295E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. K.K. Juneja, Adv. Department By Sh. A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr

sections 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 3. It is noticed at the outset that the assessee herein is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ action disallowing/adding his cost of improvement and transfer etc., to the tune of Rs.10,80,277/- thereby making

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,SITARGANJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

ITA 24/DDN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Pramod Verma, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80ISection 92BSection 92C

capital of other company which remains in existence and continues its undertaking but the context in which the term is used may show that it is intended to include such an acquisition. See: Halsbury's Laws of England (4th edition volume 7 para 1539). Two companies may join to form a new company, but there may be absorption or blending