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.

7 results for “TDS”+ Long Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai764Delhi679Bangalore340Chennai268Kolkata135Jaipur89Ahmedabad89Cochin61Hyderabad45Chandigarh43Raipur38Indore31Pune18Surat18Visakhapatnam17Lucknow14Telangana10Cuttack9Karnataka7Guwahati6Amritsar6SC6Jabalpur4Jodhpur3Calcutta2Nagpur2Agra2Patna2Dehradun1Panaji1Rajkot1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 26011Section 153C4Section 1444Section 143(3)3TDS3Section 260A2Section 1322Section 153D2Section 962Addition to Income

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. G. LAKSHMI ARUNA

ITA/705/2018HC Karnataka31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

TDS 28,20,543 Balance Tax 14,76,04,186 Less: Advance Tax 7,50,00,000 Balance Tax 7,26,04,186 Add: Interest u/s234A – 1,30,68,753 235B – 1,59,97,806 2,90,66,559 13 Total Tax 10,16,70,745 Less: 140A paid 2,00,00,000 Net Amount Payable

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. GALI JANARDHANA REDDY

ITA/704/2018HC Karnataka
2
31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

TDS 28,20,543 Balance Tax 14,76,04,186 Less: Advance Tax 7,50,00,000 Balance Tax 7,26,04,186 Add: Interest u/s234A – 1,30,68,753 12 235B – 1,59,97,806 2,90,66,559 Total Tax 10,16,70,745 Less: 140A paid 2,00,00,000 Net Amount Payable

SHRI M SATHYANARAYANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

ITA/63/2010HC Karnataka21 Jan 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Section 143(3)Section 2(31)Section 260

long term capital gains. The appellant being aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) -A, Bangalore. The First Appellate Authority confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer dismissing the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred an appeal before the ITAT, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore. 3. ITAT dismissed

L. VENKATARAMANA RAJU vs. UNION OF INDIA

WP/53718/2017HC Karnataka21 Apr 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

Section 96

terms of the Act, 2013 as per the undertaking given by the KIADB before this Court in the event the petitioners are not agreeable for a consent award under Section 29[2] of the KIAD Act. With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petitions are dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the writ petitions, all the pending I.As stand

M/S SRI BALAJI CORPORATE SERVICES vs. UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE

WP/43206/2018HC Karnataka21 Apr 2022

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

Section 96

terms of the Act, 2013 as per the undertaking given by the KIADB before this Court in the event the petitioners are not agreeable for a consent award under Section 29[2] of the KIAD Act. With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petitions are dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the writ petitions, all the pending I.As stand

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S WIPRO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/211/2009HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

terms of the order of the Tribunal, it is open to the assessing authority to recompute the opening and closing balance by adding the duty paid and duty availed but - 101 - on the unavailed MODVAT credit, there is no liability to pay any tax. Therefore, the substantial question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

ITA/881/2008HC Karnataka25 Mar 2015

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260

terms of the order of the Tribunal, it is open to the assessing authority to recompute the opening and closing balance by adding the duty paid and duty availed but - 101 - on the unavailed MODVAT credit, there is no liability to pay any tax. Therefore, the substantial question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against