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.

24 results for “capital gains”+ Section 145Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai137Delhi115Chandigarh108Cochin63Ahmedabad31Chennai25Kolkata24Bangalore21Jaipur8Rajkot5Hyderabad5Pune3Indore2Cuttack2Karnataka2Visakhapatnam1Panaji1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)19Addition to Income15Section 14810Section 14710Disallowance10Section 115J9Deduction7Section 2506Section 145A6Section 14A

M/S. IMC LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 813/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

section 10(2) does not deal exhaustively with the deductions, which must be made to arrive at the true profits and gains. To find out whether an expenditure is on the capital account or on revenue, one must consider the expenditure in relation to the business. Since all payments reduce capital in the ultimate analysis, one is apt to consider

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. I M C LTD, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

6
Section 234B6
Depreciation6
ITA 371/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

section 10(2) does not deal exhaustively with the deductions, which must be made to arrive at the true profits and gains. To find out whether an expenditure is on the capital account or on revenue, one must consider the expenditure in relation to the business. Since all payments reduce capital in the ultimate analysis, one is apt to consider

DCIT, CIRCLE - 11, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. IMC LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 781/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

section 10(2) does not deal exhaustively with the deductions, which must be made to arrive at the true profits and gains. To find out whether an expenditure is on the capital account or on revenue, one must consider the expenditure in relation to the business. Since all payments reduce capital in the ultimate analysis, one is apt to consider

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 852/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

gains – reference to Valuation Officer (Condition precedent) –Whether formation of opinion of Assessing Officer that value claimed by assessee is less than its fair market value is since qua non before referring matter to departmental valuation office under section 55A and reasons recorded after order of reference for valuation of registered valuer is not substitute of pre-decisional formation

M/S. ICI INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 488/KOL/2006[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

gains – reference to Valuation Officer (Condition precedent) –Whether formation of opinion of Assessing Officer that value claimed by assessee is less than its fair market value is since qua non before referring matter to departmental valuation office under section 55A and reasons recorded after order of reference for valuation of registered valuer is not substitute of pre-decisional formation

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1019/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

gains – reference to Valuation Officer (Condition precedent) –Whether formation of opinion of Assessing Officer that value claimed by assessee is less than its fair market value is since qua non before referring matter to departmental valuation office under section 55A and reasons recorded after order of reference for valuation of registered valuer is not substitute of pre-decisional formation

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ICI INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2613/KOL/2005[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(3)

gains – reference to Valuation Officer (Condition precedent) –Whether formation of opinion of Assessing Officer that value claimed by assessee is less than its fair market value is since qua non before referring matter to departmental valuation office under section 55A and reasons recorded after order of reference for valuation of registered valuer is not substitute of pre-decisional formation

D.C.I.T CIR - 12,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S JCT LIMITED., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1106/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1106 To 1109/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2004-05, 2006-07,2007-08 & 2008-09 D.C.I.T., Circle-12, -Vs.- M/S. J.C.T. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaacj 6733 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Angam Shaiza, Cit For The Respondent : Shri A.K.Gupta, Fca

For Appellant: Shri Angam Shaiza, CITFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Gupta, FCA
Section 145Section 145ASection 43B

gains of business " shall be adjusted by , the . amount paid as tax, duty, cess or fee. Therefore, the expression "incurred" in section 145A (b) must be construed to mean the liability actually incurred by the assessee. Though the 5 A.Y.2004-05,2006-07 to 2008-09 date of manufacture is the relevant date for dutiability, the relevant date for the duty

THE BARANAGAR JUTE FACTORY PLC,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT - 1, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

ITA 1149/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 1149/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Baranagar Jute Factory Plc Principal Cit-1, Kolkata C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates Vs Siddha Gibson 1, Gibson Lane Suite-213, 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700069 [Pan : Aabct0134C] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, A/R Revenue By : Shri G.H. Sema, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/04/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/06/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: This Is The Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 1, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Pr. Cit”], Passed U/S 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Dated 28/03/2018 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Assessee Has Challenged The Order Of The Ld. Pr. Cit U/S 263 Of The Act Through The Various Grounds Of Appeal. 2. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessment Was Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dt. 31/03/2016. The Ld. Pr. Cit, Upon Perusal Of The Assessment Records, Observed That The Assessing Officer Has Not Examined The Four Issues Which Were Discussed By The Ld. Pr. Cit In The Revisionary Order Which Are Extracted Below:- “2. On A Perusal Of The Assessment Record Of The Assessee, It Was Observed As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, A/RFor Respondent: Shri G.H. Sema, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 263Section 56

capital gain. According to the ld. Pr. CIT, since the amount of Rs.47,66,44,977/- is received as interest on delayed payment of compensation, the same has to be treated as I.T.A. No. 1149/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Baranagar Jute Factory PLC 3 income from other sources in terms of Section 145A

M/S. G.S. ATWAL & COMPANY (ENGINEERS) PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2114/KOL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 148

145A and the CBDT’s Circular, it is amply clear that the interest on delayed payment of Arbitration Award amount cannot be assessed to income-tax in one lump-sum in the year under appeal in which the same was received, rather it is to be assessed in the respective years in which the same had accrued. Hence

M/S. G.S. ATWAL & COMPANY (ENGINEERS) PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2115/KOL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 148

145A and the CBDT’s Circular, it is amply clear that the interest on delayed payment of Arbitration Award amount cannot be assessed to income-tax in one lump-sum in the year under appeal in which the same was received, rather it is to be assessed in the respective years in which the same had accrued. Hence

M/S. G.S. ATWAL & COMPANY (ENGINEERS) PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1938/KOL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jun 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234DSection 250Section 32(1)(iia)

145A and the CBDT’s Circular, it is amply clear that the interest on delayed payment of Arbitration Award amount cannot be assessed to income-tax in one lump-sum in the year under appeal in which 5 I.T.A. Nos. 1937 & 1938/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 M/s. G.S. Atwal & Co. (Engg.) Pvt. Ltd. the same was received, rather

M/S. G.S. ATWAL & COMPANY (ENGINEERS) PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1937/KOL/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jun 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234DSection 250Section 32(1)(iia)

145A and the CBDT’s Circular, it is amply clear that the interest on delayed payment of Arbitration Award amount cannot be assessed to income-tax in one lump-sum in the year under appeal in which 5 I.T.A. Nos. 1937 & 1938/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 M/s. G.S. Atwal & Co. (Engg.) Pvt. Ltd. the same was received, rather

SEEMA SUREKA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2682/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 250Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

gain since the rate of\ntax prevailing for this assessment year was 30% u/s 115BBE of the Act.\nThis rate was enhanced to 60% from AY 2017-18 only. While the issue of\ntaxation would at best be a secondary consideration in deciding the merit\nof the case, it does have a certain persuasive value considering that the\nimpugned amount

CHANDRA BROS.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 37(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1572/KOL/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 145(2)Section 250Section 44A

capital. The ITO issued a notice under section 23(2) of the 1922 Act on the same day viz., 10-4-1962 posting the hearing for the same day and completed the assessment also on the same day. Thereafter, the ITO reopened assessment under section 147(6) taking the view that the revaluation difference should have been brought

ACIT, CC-XX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. PAHARPUR COOLING TOWERS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, this ground is allowed

ITA 1370/KOL/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Navin Verma & Nitin Agarwal, ARs
Section 143(3)

capital in nature as the subsidy was given for establishing the industry and not for carrying on of the business. In view of the aforesaid facts and purpose of the subsidy and respectfully following the judicial precedents relied upon hereinabove, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld CITA in this regard. Hence the ground raised

ITO, WD.9(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S MAHARAJ VINCOM PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 35/KOL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata……………….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…..…..... Respondent 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] C.O. No.6/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…....... Cross-Objector 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] Vs Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata …………..….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 07, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 15, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: This Appeal By The Revenue & Corresponding Cross-Objection By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated 08.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 263

145A cannot be interpreted as identical to or overlapping section 147/148/149. They are predicated on different circumstances and operate in disparate dimensions. The Income-tax Act makes it incumbent upon every person whose total income exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable to Income-tax to file a return of income in order to kick-start the normal assessment

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. STADMED PRIVATE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 200/KOL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

sections 30 to 36; and • The expenditure should not be personal expenditure of the assessee. In the context of travel/tour expenses, Specially in the cases of non-corporate assessees like individuals, Hindu undivided families, firms and partnerships, these tests are generally applied rigidly/instinctively with a set mind that considerable personal benefit is derived from such expenses and hence, at least

STADMED PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 136/KOL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

sections 30 to 36; and • The expenditure should not be personal expenditure of the assessee. In the context of travel/tour expenses, Specially in the cases of non-corporate assessees like individuals, Hindu undivided families, firms and partnerships, these tests are generally applied rigidly/instinctively with a set mind that considerable personal benefit is derived from such expenses and hence, at least

TARUN KANTI ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-2(4), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1778/KOL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, & Mrs. Saswati Mitra Dutta,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl.CIT
Section 145ASection 250Section 45(5)

capital gains’ and under the head ‘other sources ‘ , during the course of appellate proceedings the ld. Counsel for the assessee did not press ground no.1 to 4,5 and 6. He has only pressed ground no.3 which reads as follows :- “3. For that the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in adding Rs.416,516/- u/s 45(5) of the I.T.Act, 1961 with