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.

2 results for “capital gains”+ Section 71clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,829Delhi1,586Bangalore607Chennai555Ahmedabad521Jaipur364Kolkata356Hyderabad228Surat226Chandigarh203Pune160Indore154Karnataka143Cochin122Raipur83Visakhapatnam76Nagpur60Calcutta60Cuttack55Lucknow39Rajkot35Guwahati30Telangana23Amritsar21SC19Agra14Dehradun12Jodhpur12Allahabad10Ranchi8Jabalpur6Patna5Rajasthan4Kerala2Panaji2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 2632Section 402Section 194A(3)(iv)2Disallowance2

M/S R. S. SHETYE & BROS,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), PANAJI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 37/PAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. No.37/Pan/2023 (A.Y.2016-17) R.S.Shetye & Bros, Vs Acit 1(1), Flat.No.14, 1 St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, . Trionara Apartments, Edc, Patto, New Muncipal Market, Panjim Panaji- Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan .No.Aabfr9785N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 3

section 3 ITA. No.37/PAN/2023 R.S.Shetye and Bros. 135 of the companies Act2013 shall not be deemed to be an expenditure incurred for the purpose of business and also the assessee has not proved that they are incurred /incidental to the business of the assessee and made disallowance of Rs.8,66,910/- (ii)the second disputed issue that the assessee

SHRI NITIN A SHIRGURKAR,BELGAVI vs. PR. CIT, HUBBALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowe

ITA 77/PAN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji
13 May 2022
AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194A(3)(iii)Section 194A(3)(iv)Section 263Section 40

71,293/-, in spite of the fact on record that the same spite of the fact on record that the same was paid along with interest was paid along with interest before the due date of filing ROI as before the due date of filing ROI as evidenced by Tax Audit Report. 9. The Pr.CIT erred in setting aside