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.

292 results for “capital gains”+ Section 23clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,192Delhi3,290Bangalore1,517Chennai1,123Ahmedabad851Kolkata825Jaipur713Hyderabad580Pune442Surat362Chandigarh343Indore301Karnataka292Cochin185Visakhapatnam178Raipur175Rajkot125Nagpur105Agra98Cuttack90Lucknow89Amritsar84SC71Calcutta67Guwahati64Telangana56Panaji43Patna33Jabalpur30Jodhpur30Dehradun28Ranchi25Allahabad15Varanasi13Kerala11Rajasthan9Gauhati2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Orissa2Punjab & Haryana2Andhra Pradesh2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Section 260140Section 8056Section 260A36Section 14835Deduction23Section 143(3)18Capital Gains16Section 4715Section 214Section 56

SRI. P S SESHADRI. vs. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, this petition is allowed in part

WP/42424/2012HC Karnataka02 Jul 2013

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice Ram Mohan Reddy

Section 119(2)(c)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234Section 234ASection 54E

23 15. Clause (b) of Subsection (3) of Section 54EC as it stood prior to its substitution by Finance Act 2007 was without any limit over the ‘capital gain

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PRAKASH ELECTRIC COMPANY

Showing 1–20 of 292 · Page 1 of 15

...
13
Addition to Income13
Exemption10
ITA/884/2007HC Karnataka23 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 47Section 47A

capital gain will be chargeable in the hands of the firm and section 45 will not be excluded. However, if any of the conditions mentioned in the proviso to clause 47(xiii) is not complied then, section 47A will be applicable. In the instant case, Date of Order: 23

KIDS CLINIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

COP/60/2015HC Karnataka21 Aug 2015

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

Section 260Section 47Section 47A

capital gain will be chargeable in the hands of the firm and section 45 will not be excluded. However, if any of the conditions mentioned in the proviso to clause 47(xiii) is not complied then, section 47A will be applicable. In the instant case, Date of Order: 23

THE COMMR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S DYNAMIC ENTERPRISE

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/1414/2006HC Karnataka16 Sept 2013

Bench: This Bench.

Section 148Section 2(47)Section 45(4)

23. Sub-section (4) of Section 45 deals with a distribution of capital assets on the dissolution of a firm or other association of persons or body of individuals or otherwise. If in the course of such distribution of capital asset there is a transfer of a capital asset by the firm in favour of a person and it results

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

ITA/254/2021HC Karnataka09 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

Section 260Section 260ASection 54Section 54F

Section 54F of the Act on the entire capital gains from sale of land amounting to Rs.49,08,708/-. 4. The appellant sold a residential house at Angamaly, Kerala i.e., House property in favour of M/s. Fashion Jewellery for Rs.2.42 Crores vide sale deed registered on 08.10.2012. Capital gains amounting to Rs.2,23

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

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

ITA/568/2015HC Karnataka04 Oct 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 143Section 2(24)Section 220Section 220(2)Section 254Section 260Section 260ASection 45

capital gains, in view of B.C.Srinivasa Setty supra, the Revenue has made an attempt to treat the technical know-how as goodwill in the second round. 15. This reasoning of the Tribunal cannot be faulted with, in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in B.C.Srinivasa Setty supra. The gain from transfer of business by implication

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. LATE KHOOBCHAND M MAKHIJA

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/496/2007HC Karnataka18 Dec 2013

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 148Section 260Section 54(1)Section 54(2)

Section 45 is to be offered for tax only in the previous year in which the period of three years from the date of the transfer of the original asset expires. Therefore, the contention that immediately after the purchase of the new asset in that relevant year, the unutilized capital gains should have been offered to tax, is untenable. That

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT SAROJINI M KUSHE

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA/475/2016HC Karnataka01 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

Section 260Section 260ASection 48Section 50CSection 50D

gains could be computed, placing reliance on B.C.Srinivasa Setty supra. It appears to overcome this aspect, a machinery provision has been introduced by way of Section 50D of the Act. Though the said provision has come into effect from 1.4.2013, it certainly throws some light on the mode of computation under Section 48 of the Act. In the circumstances

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.WINTAC LTD.,

The appeal is allowed in part

ITA/910/2006HC Karnataka19 Sept 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)

capital gain. There is no dispute regarding the said transaction. The saleable items were sold during financial year 2000-01 and remaining raw materials was shifted to rented warehouse while handing over the factory to HILKAL Ltd. All these raw materials are unsalable items, they 20 are toxic materials of Bulk Drug section, they are waste, have no sale value

PR COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX-6 vs. M R KODANDRAM

Appeals stand dismissed

WTA/11/2017HC Karnataka18 Oct 2019

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI

Section 260Section 260A

Section 53 of the TP Act in the context of capital gains under the Income Tax Act, it has been held thus: - 23

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ASSOCIATED ELECTRONIC AND ELCTRICAL

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/358/2009HC Karnataka18 Dec 2015

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

Section 260Section 48Section 55Section 55(2)(a)

Section 55(2)(b) of the Act prior to the amendment provided for the levy of tax on capital gains in relation to a capital asset, being goodwill of a business. Insertion of the words, “registered trade marks or brand name associated with the business” by the Finance Act, 2001 depicts the intention of the Legislature to levy

M/S NANDI STEELS LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the findings

ITA/103/2012HC Karnataka23 Feb 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 6

23 on capital gains. Thereafter the decision of the Supreme Court in Express Newspapers was considered in CIT vs. CHUGANDAS AND CO and COCANADA RADHASWAMI BANK LTD. subsequently. In Express Newspapers supra, the Supreme Court dealt with the issue whether the capital gains can be taxed in the hands of the successor company and the issue whether the character

M/S BHORUKA ENGINEERING INDS. LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed

ITA/120/2011HC Karnataka09 Apr 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,N.KUMAR

Section 260A

capital gain of a company shall be taken into account in computing the book profit and income-tax payable under Section 115JB.. 38 Explanation.—For the purposes of this clause, "equity oriented fund" means a fund— (i) where the investible funds are invested by way of equity shares in domestic companies to the extent of more than [sixty-five

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

ITA/504/2013HC Karnataka01 Jul 2015

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

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

capital gains, and also disallowed 50% of expenses on transfer claimed by the assessee. Besides this, certain other disallowances were also made by the Assessing Officer. Challenging the same, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who granted certain relief, but confirmed the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act; the assessment

P VIKRAM MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

WP/11385/2016HC Karnataka05 Nov 2019

Bench: S.SUJATHA

Section 143Section 148Section 28

Capital gain and the same has been accepted as such in the assessment proceedings. Last date for issue of notice u/s 148 is 31/03/2013. Last date for passing order u/s. 263 is 31/03/2013. Tax effect involved is Rs.1,01,97,000/- 5 a]. if remedial action is taken, details such as section and date of NA - 16 - order demand raised

P ARVIND MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

WP/12118/2016HC Karnataka05 Nov 2019

Bench: S.SUJATHA

Section 143Section 148Section 28

Capital gain and the same has been accepted as such in the assessment proceedings. Last date for issue of notice u/s 148 is 31/03/2013. Last date for passing order u/s. 263 is 31/03/2013. Tax effect involved is Rs.1,01,64,058/- 5 a]. if remedial action is taken, details such as section and date of NA - 16 - order demand raised

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S IND SING DEVELOPERS P LTD

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/541/2015HC Karnataka02 Mar 2016

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

Section 167BSection 2(31)Section 2(47)Section 260Section 3Section 4Section 67A

capital gains. v) If there was no AOP what was the date of transfer of subject property to M/s. Parkway Developments Pvt. Ltd., ie, whether such transfer was a) AT the time of MOU? b) At the time of principle agreement? c) At the time of settlement deed? 4 d) At the time of execution of conveyance deed? 17. Taking

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. VIKRAM REDDY

In the result, the fifth substantial question of

ITA/291/2013HC Karnataka24 Feb 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 260Section 260A

gains" shall be computed, by deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset the following amounts, namely :— (i) expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer; 19 (ii) the cost of acquisition of the asset and the cost of any improvement thereto: 49. (1) Where

LAHAR SINGH SIROYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal stands allowed

ITA/169/2010HC Karnataka15 Dec 2015

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 2

capital gains, as had been claimed by him. 9. In the case of Sanjeev lal (supra), the Apex Court was considering a case where an agreement to sell his property was entered into by the assessee therein on 8 27.12.2002 for a consideration of Rs.1.32 crores, out of which only Rs.15.00 lakhs had been paid to the assessee as earnest

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GMR HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/58/2012HC Karnataka31 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 260Section 260A

gains” (whether relating to short-term Date of Judgment 31-07-2018 I.T.A.No.58/2012 Commissioner of Income-tax & Anr. vs. M/s. GMR Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 7/16 capital assets or any other capital assets).” In view of the above, we are of the considered view that the second objection of the AO in the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment