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.

8 results for “capital gains”+ Section 36(1)(viia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai209Bangalore58Chandigarh51Delhi46Chennai42Cochin23Pune14Hyderabad14Jaipur10Visakhapatnam8Cuttack8Indore8Surat8Kolkata7Ahmedabad5Rajkot4Nagpur4SC3Karnataka3Amritsar1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 26330Section 36(1)(viia)9Section 56(2)(viib)6Capital Gains6Long Term Capital Gains6Section 36(1)(viii)5Section 143(3)2Section 37(1)2Disallowance2

M/S JILA SAHAKARI KENDRIYA BANK MARYADIT,MANDSAUR vs. THE DCIT, RATLAM

In the result Ground No.1 & 2 raised by the

ITA 386/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Jila Sahakari Kendriya Dcit, Ratlam Bank Maryadit, Vs. Mhow-Neemuch Road, Mandsaur (M.P) (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aaatj2383F Revenue By Shri Lalchand, Cit Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande,Ca Date Of Hearing 25.7.2018 Date Of 17.8.2018 Pronouncement

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

gains of business or profession" (before making any deduction under this clause) carried to such reserve account: Provided that where the aggregate of the amounts carried to such reserve account from time to time exceeds twice the amount of the paid up share capital and of the general reserves of the specified entity, no allowance under this clause shall

M/S. CHARITRA GOLD PVT. LTD.,RATLAM vs. THE PR. CIT, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 517/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

36. In the instant case we find that the Ld. PCIT has referred to the investigation by DG(Inv.), Bhopal but the revenue authorities has not placed the copy of the reports before us. Ld. PCIT has submitted that the alleged fraudulent transaction of bogus entries of Long Term Capital Gain were carried out through brokers posted at Kolkatta

SHRI ADITYA MUNDRA,DEWAS vs. PCIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 632/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

36. In the instant case we find that the Ld. PCIT has referred to the investigation by DG(Inv.), Bhopal but the revenue authorities has not placed the copy of the reports before us. Ld. PCIT has submitted that the alleged fraudulent transaction of bogus entries of Long Term Capital Gain were carried out through brokers posted at Kolkatta

SHRI GOVIND DAS MUNDRA,INDORE vs. PCIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 634/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

36. In the instant case we find that the Ld. PCIT has referred to the investigation by DG(Inv.), Bhopal but the revenue authorities has not placed the copy of the reports before us. Ld. PCIT has submitted that the alleged fraudulent transaction of bogus entries of Long Term Capital Gain were carried out through brokers posted at Kolkatta

SHRI MANOJ MUNDRA,INDORE vs. PCIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 637/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

36. In the instant case we find that the Ld. PCIT has referred to the investigation by DG(Inv.), Bhopal but the revenue authorities has not placed the copy of the reports before us. Ld. PCIT has submitted that the alleged fraudulent transaction of bogus entries of Long Term Capital Gain were carried out through brokers posted at Kolkatta

SHRI MANISH MUNDRA,INDORE vs. PCIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 635/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

36. In the instant case we find that the Ld. PCIT has referred to the investigation by DG(Inv.), Bhopal but the revenue authorities has not placed the copy of the reports before us. Ld. PCIT has submitted that the alleged fraudulent transaction of bogus entries of Long Term Capital Gain were carried out through brokers posted at Kolkatta

DHIRENDRA INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD.,NEEMUCH vs. PR. CIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 750/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

36. In the instant case we find that the Ld. PCIT has referred to the investigation by DG(Inv.), Bhopal but the revenue authorities has not placed the copy of the reports before us. Ld. PCIT has submitted that the alleged fraudulent transaction of bogus entries of Long Term Capital Gain were carried out through brokers posted at Kolkatta

M/S. BHAGIRATH COACH & METAL FABRICATORS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 351/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2013-14 M/S. Bhagirath Coach & Dcit 1(1), Metal Fabricators Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Indore C/O M. Mehta & Co, 11/5, South Tukoganj, Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aaacb7112P Revenue By Shri R.P. Mourya, Sr.Dr Assessee By S/Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra,Cas Date Of Hearing 17.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2018 O R D E R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

gains of a business u/s 28 of the Income Tax Act.” 16. We therefore respectfully following the ratio laid down in the in its capacity as a person carrying on business and the contract for taking an agency of vehicle manufactured by Maruti Suzuki India Ltd was a business contract entered into with a view to earn profit