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 50C(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai660Delhi394Hyderabad201Ahmedabad199Jaipur190Chennai188Kolkata142Pune132Indore99Bangalore99Surat96Visakhapatnam57Nagpur50Rajkot39Agra34Chandigarh30Lucknow28Raipur24Dehradun18Jodhpur17Jabalpur15Patna14Amritsar13Ranchi10Cochin9Karnataka8Allahabad6Cuttack5Panaji3Varanasi3Calcutta2Telangana2Guwahati2SC1

Key Topics

Section 2609Section 260A7Section 50C7Capital Gains6Section 545Addition to Income4Section 1483Section 2633Section 143(2)2

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

3. The respondent – assessee is an individual deriving managerial remuneration from M/s PVS Beedies (P) Ltd. The assessee filed return of income for the assessment year under consideration declaring the total income of Rs.28,39,420/- and subsequently filed revised return of income declaring the income of Rs.1,02,10,700/- including an additional income of Rs.73

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

Appeals stand dismissed

Section 1472
Long Term Capital Gains2
Exemption2
WTA/11/2017HC Karnataka18 Oct 2019

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI

Section 260Section 260A

3. The assessing officer completed the assessment by computing the long term capital gains, quantifying the sale consideration as the cost of construction of 26% of constructed area and allotted to the assessee as per the JDA dated 11.5.2009 treating the cost of construction as the full value of consideration. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner

V.S. CHANDRASHEKAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the first substantial question of law is

ITA/70/2015HC Karnataka02 Feb 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260Section 260ASection 50C

capital gains' and 3 not under the head 'profit and gains from business or profession? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that provisions of Section 50C

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 tax for the lands sold during 2005. 3 2. Bhoruka Steel Limited (BSL) was incorporated in the year 1969. It had a mini steel plant for the manufacture of billets and rolled products at Bangalore. It commenced its commercial production in 1972 and set up a refractory plant at Bangalore. They also set up a stevedoring division

SMT JOSHNA RAJENDRA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Accordingly, it stands dismissed

ITA/8/2018HC Karnataka04 Dec 2019

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 50C

3 :- Assessing Officer issued notice to assessee under Section 148 of the Act on 17.02.2012. Subsequently, notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act came to be issued to assessee on 16.03.2012 and 20.09.2012 respectively. On the basis of the reply received, assessment order came to be passed on 19.03.2013 (Annexure-B). 4. Being aggrieved by said

ARUN K THIAGARAJAN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order passed by the assessing officer and

ITA/25/2011HC Karnataka18 Jun 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 54

3. The assessee was the owner of a residential property situate at Harrington Road Chetpet, Chennai. The said property was sold vide registered sale deed dated 09.10.2002 for a consideration of Rs.2,68,89,375/-. The assessee filed return of income on 09.07.2003 for Assessment year 2003-04 declaring income of Rs.1,68,52,920/-, under the head income from

K R SATYANARAYANA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the orders passed by the Commissioner of

ITA/192/2015HC Karnataka21 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(2)Section 154Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 50CSection 80C

3. Thereafter a notice under Section 263 of the Act was issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax inter alia on the ground that income assessed as income from business in respect of sale of properties as income from capital gains to disallow interest on loan of purchase of property as deduction from sale consideration, to direct the Assessing Officer

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SANYO BPL P LTD

The appeal is disposed of with liberty to revive the same if the occasion so

ITA/923/2017HC Karnataka28 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 260Section 50CSection 92C

capital gain by adopting guidance value of the property by erroneously holding that the assessing authority ought to 3 have referred the matter to DVO for determination guidance value as per Section 50C