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.

5 results for “capital gains”+ Section 35Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai119Delhi79Chennai43Ahmedabad41Raipur18Bangalore15Chandigarh14Cochin8Hyderabad8Jaipur8Kolkata7Karnataka5Pune5Visakhapatnam4Cuttack4Guwahati3Rajkot2Indore1Kerala1Punjab & Haryana1SC1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 35D19Section 10A8Section 2606Deduction5Section 80J4Section 2632

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SUBEX LTD

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

ITA/684/2015HC Karnataka01 Oct 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 143Section 2Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 35D

Section 35D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, ‘the Act’]? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in treating the foreign exchange gain - 3 - as a gain on capital

M/S SUBEX LTD vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA/394/2016HC Karnataka01 Oct 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 10ASection 260Section 35D

Capital Employed’ for allowing deduction under Section 35D of the IT Act? 2. Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is - 3 - right in law in holding that the cost of acquisition of companies cannot be treated as asset for allowing deduction under Section 35D of the IT Act? 3. Whether, in the facts

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S. ONMOBILE GLOBAL LTD

In the result, the matter is remitted to the Tribunal to

ITA/340/2014HC Karnataka18 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 260Section 35DSection 80J

capital in nature and not revenue expenditure. Even the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has accepted the aforesaid finding of the Assessing Officer. However, the benefit of deduction of stamp duty has been granted in view of Section 35D(3)(c) of the Act. The Tribunal has affirmed 14 the aforesaid finding. The relevant extract of Section 35D

M/S SUBEX LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, appeal is partly allowed as indicated

ITA/395/2016HC Karnataka01 Oct 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 10ASection 260Section 35D

Capital Employed’ for allowing deduction under Section 35D of the IT Act? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Honourable ITAT was right in law in holding that the cost - 3 - of acquisition of companies cannot be treated as asset for allowing deduction under Section 35D of the IT Act? 3. Whether

M/S SUBEX LTD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, appeal is partly allowed as indicated

ITA/705/2017HC Karnataka01 Oct 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 260Section 35D

Capital Employed’ for allowing deduction under Section 35D of the Income- tax Act, 1961? - 3 - 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Honourable ITAT was right in law in holding that the cost of acquisition of companies cannot be treated as asset for allowing deduction under Section 35D of the Act? 3. Whether