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.

190 results for “capital gains”+ Carry Forward of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,512Delhi1,216Kolkata785Ahmedabad641Bangalore494Chennai442Jaipur303Pune246Chandigarh219Hyderabad190Raipur124Cochin116Nagpur100Surat96Indore93Karnataka88Rajkot86Cuttack73Visakhapatnam67Lucknow57Guwahati54Amritsar52Calcutta43SC27Ranchi22Telangana14Jodhpur13Panaji13Jabalpur11Agra10Kerala8Patna7Varanasi7Allahabad6Dehradun6Rajasthan2Orissa2Himachal Pradesh1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Andhra Pradesh1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 153C112Section 143(3)95Addition to Income87Section 6860Disallowance50Section 26331Search & Seizure29Deduction28Cash Deposit25

PONAPULA SULOCHANA LR LATE P SANJEEVA PARTHASARATHY,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAX ,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 294/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

carry-forward capital loss for the assessment year under consideration, the set-off claimed by the assessee for Rs. 3,47,754/- against short-term capital gain

Showing 1–20 of 190 · Page 1 of 10

...
Section 36(1)(vii)22
Section 153A18
Section 36(1)(viia)16

PONNAPULA SULOCHANA, L/R OF LATE PONNAPULA SANJEEVA PARTHASARATHY,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT ,CENTRAL CIRCLE -3(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 295/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

carry-forward capital loss for the assessment year under consideration, the set-off claimed by the assessee for Rs. 3,47,754/- against short-term capital gain

SHRI GAYATRI CONSTRUCTIONS,NELLORE vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, NELLORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 294/HYD/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2025

Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

carry-forward capital loss for the assessment year under consideration, the set-off claimed by the assessee for Rs. 3,47,754/- against short-term capital gain

ROCKSALT INTERACTIVE GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 403/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarm/S. Rocksalt Interactive Income Tax Officer, Vs. Games Pvt. Ltd., Ward 3(2), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan Aafcr3033A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Respondent By : Shri Vijay Bhaskar Reddy, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dt.30.03.2020 Of The Learned Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Cit-3, Hyderabad Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16 U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Bhaskar
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 263Section 72Section 73Section 73ASection 74Section 74ASection 80

Capital gains" and claims that the loss or any part thereof should be carried forward under subsection (1) of section

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE -1(2) , HYDERABAD vs. AMSRI BUILDERS, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1106/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Y.V.S.T. SaiFor Respondent: S/Shri K.C. Devdas
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

carry forward of loss pertaining to business or capital gains. Unabsorbed depreciation should be carry forward u/s.32(2) of the IT Act. Therefore

JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRLCE -1(2) , HYDERABAD vs. AMSRI BUILDERS, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1105/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Y.V.S.T. SaiFor Respondent: S/Shri K.C. Devdas
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

carry forward of loss pertaining to business or capital gains. Unabsorbed depreciation should be carry forward u/s.32(2) of the IT Act. Therefore

YERRAM VENKATA SUBBA REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1119/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rajendra Kumar, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32(1)Section 43(6)Section 50C

loss can be set off under sections 70 and 71. If some part of the depreciation allowance remained unabsorbed, it can be carried forward under section 32(2) to the following year and set off against the year's profits and so on for succeeding years. The carried forward depreciation allowance is deemed to be part of that year

ISHOO NARANG,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/HYD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2022 & S.A. No.1/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ishoo Narang Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaupn9082B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15/07/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Al The Mandatory Preconditions Before Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Were Duly Complied & Met With By The A.O.

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT (DR)
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 147Section 68

forward his case before the AO but he chose not to do so for reasons best known to him. e) As evident from paras 5 and 5.1 of assessment order it is clear that reasonable opportunity of being heard was provided to appellant but the appellant chose not to avail the said opportunities for reasons best known

SHRI RAMPRIYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1946/HYD/2017[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Aug 2024AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1946/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Shri Rampriya Developers Vs. Dy. C. I. T. (P) Ltd Circle 3(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aajcs6629P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 14/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

capital expenditure or personal expenses of/ the assessee), laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for the purposes of the business or profession shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head “profits and gains of business or profession”. Explanation - for the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that any expenditure incurred by an assessee

BIO TECH PHARMA (P) LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1057/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony(Through Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year:2012-13 Bio Tech Pharma (P) Limited, Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Hyderabad. Tax, Circle-1(2), Pan: Aaacb 8962 D Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar Revenue By: Shri Aluru Venkata Rao, Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/10/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/10/2020

For Appellant: Shri T. Chaitanya KumarFor Respondent: Shri Aluru Venkata Rao, DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234C

forward short term capital loss can be only set off only against income under the head “capital gains” (short term capital gain as well as long term capital gain) assessable for the relevant assessment year. Therefore, Carry

THE SECUNDERBAD CLUB ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD -10(2), HYDERABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 166/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri L.Jeevanlal, DR
Section 143(3)

capital gains of the subsequent years? The answer is emphatically in the negative.” Hon’ble Gujarat High Court judgment in (2015) 367 ITR 261 (Guj) Kishorebhai Bikabhai Virani Vs. ACIT also holds that a loss under an exempt source is not to be carried forward

ANIRUDH VENKATA RAGI ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 352/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

carried out by the assessee is Page 5 of 28 genuine and the learned Assessing Officer and the learned CIT (Appeals) are not correct in holding that the share transaction is not genuine. 11. He further submitted that the learned Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) presumed that the transactions entered into by the assessee also are not genuine

KYORI INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 451/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri A .Mohan Alankamony & Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Kyori Infrastructure Pvt Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Ltd., C/O. P Murali & Co., Ca, Hyderabad 6-3-655/2/3, Samajiguda, Hyderabad Pan/Gir No. (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.Bala Krishna Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 13/10/ 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/01/2022 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order U/S.263 Of The Act Of The Pr. Cit-2, Hyderabad Dated 26.2.2020 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Construction & Infrastructure Activity. It Filed The Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2015-16 On 30.9.2015 Declaring Total Income At Rs.15,58,050/-. The Case Was Taken Up For Scrutiny & The Assessment Was Completed U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 27.12.2017 With The Assessed Income At Rs.15,58,050/-. P A G E 1 | 11 Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Bala Krishna CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 45(2)

loss in the return. Ld A.R. also submitted that the assessee has rightly offered the sale proceeds as part of income in the financial statement and has rightly disclosed the sale proceeds as part of land in its financial statement being part of assessment records and thus, invoking of revisionary power u/s.263 of the Act is not applicable

ASHA NIMMAGADDA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-2(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 215/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, ARFor Respondent: MS. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 50C

losses of current year to be carried forward of Rs. 3,75,59,729/-. By order dated 28/12/2018 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”), learned Assessing Officer held that the assessee having derived capital gains

GAUTAM CHAND JAIN (HUF),SECUNDERABAD. vs. DCIT., CIRCLE - 6(1), HYDERABAD.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 409/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.409/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Gautam Chand Jain(Huf) Vs. Deputy Commissioner Secunderabad Of Income Tax Pan : Aabhg7699J Circle-6(1) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri K.Sai Prasad, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/07/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 08/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

For Appellant: Shri K.Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Narender Kumar Naik
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 263

gain, but an income to be brought to tax under the head “income from other sources”. The AO allowed carry forward capital loss

SHANKAR LAL AGARWAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 150/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya, ARFor Respondent: Ms. P. Sumitha, DR
Section 10(38)

carried out by the assessee is genuine and the learned Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(Appeals) are not correct in holding that the share transaction is not genuine. 11. She further submitted that the learned Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) presumed that the transactions entered into by the assessee also are not genuine, but this presumption

SECUNDERABAD CLUB,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-10(2), HYDERABAD

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 153/HYD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L. P. Sahu(Through Virtual Hearing) M/S. Secunderabad Club, Hyderabad. Pan Aaaat2534E …..Appellant. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(2), Hyderabad. …..Respondent. Appellant By : None. Respondent By : Shri Paruchuri Dinesh. (D.R.) Date Of Hearing : 18.10.2021. Date Of Pronouncement : 16.11.2021. O R D E R Per Shri S.S. Godara, J.M. : This Assessee’S Appeal For Asst. Year 2013-14 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Hyderabad’S Order Dt.16.02.2018 Passed In Case No.0051/2016-17/B2/Cit(A)-6 In Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Paruchuri Dinesh. (D.R.)
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(vii)Section 71

capital gains of the subsequent years? The answer is emphatically in the negative.” Hon’ble Gujarat High Court judgment in (2015) 367 ITR 261 (Guj) Kishorebhai Bikabhai Virani Vs. ACIT also holds that a loss under an exempt source is not to be carried forward

RAJASEKHAR NAIDU GALLA,TIRUPATI vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), TIRUPATHI

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

ITA 917/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

gain or loss as per the provisions of the Act. The A.O. accepted the explanation of the assessee and completed the assessment without making any addition. Therefore, it is necessary for us to consider whether the assessment order passed by the A.O. is erroneous insofar as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue in the light

DCIT CIRCLE -2(2), HYDERABAD vs. GOCL CORPORATION LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

ITA 469/HYD/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 Gocl Corporation Ltd Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 2(2) Pan:Aabcg8433B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate Y Ratnakar Revenue By: Smt.Th Vijaya Lakshmi,Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/09/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15.11.2021 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Delhi Relating To A.Y.2009-10. 2. There Is A Delay Of 74 Days In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee For Which The Assessee Has Filed A Condonation Application Along With An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Contents Of The Condonation Petition Filed Along With The Affidavit & After Hearing Both Sides, The Delay In Filing Of This Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Advocate Y RatnakarFor Respondent: Smt.TH Vijaya Lakshmi,CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

forward business loss and Long-Term Capital Gain of Rs.10,47,14,795/-. The matter was referred to the TPO for determination of the ALP. Thereafter the Assessing Officer passed the draft assessment order. The assessee approached the DRP who gave directions to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer thereafter completed the final assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA/r.w.s. 144C

CHANDANA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 377/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Deviassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Sri Waseem-ur-Rehman,DR
Section 147Section 154Section 50Section 50CSection 72

carry forward business loss against the technical STCG arising out of sale of depreciable Business Asset. 9) The Appellant Company prays that the brought forward business losses be directed to be set off against the Technical STCGs of the AY 2009-10 ,which resulted from the sale of depreciable business assets. 10) The appellant Company craves for the leave