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.

4 results for “capital gains”+ Section 36(1)(vi)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,446Mumbai1,444Bangalore732Ahmedabad388Chennai354Jaipur313Kolkata251Chandigarh169Hyderabad165Karnataka158Indore122Pune81Raipur76Cochin76Nagpur67Calcutta55Guwahati47Surat44Lucknow43Rajkot39Cuttack37Panaji34SC27Amritsar24Telangana21Visakhapatnam19Agra16Ranchi11Dehradun10Jodhpur7Varanasi7Allahabad6Kerala5Rajasthan4Patna2Punjab & Haryana1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Andhra Pradesh1

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT LTD

ITA/6/2021HC Rajasthan01 Nov 2022

Bench: SANDEEP MEHTA,KULDEEP MATHUR

For Respondent: THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

vi) Whether mere deduction of tax at source on an amount paid is sufficient to establish that alleged service is rendered, in respect of the amount paid ? (vii) Whether payment made to erstwhile trustees without services actually rendered by them, will fall outside the ambit of Sec.13 ? (viii) Whether mere book addition in the asset side of the balance sheet

DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS)

ITA/7/2020HC Rajasthan17 Mar 2021

Bench: SANGEET LODHA,RAMESHWAR VYAS

36 absence of an Appropriation Act being passed by the State Legislature according sanction for incurring such expenditure, and without adhering to the procedure prescribed under Articles 203 and 204. Therefore no expenditure, in connection with the provision of facilities like accommodation, water, electricity, vehicles, petrol, diesel etc, could have been incurred by the State Government for the benefit

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL, vs. MS. HARSHITA MAHESHWARI,

ITA/94/2020HC Rajasthan21 Feb 2024

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,SHUBHA MEHTA

1 and 2 companies and certain other individuals as Directors of 4 listed companies, 3 subsidiaries of one listed company and an unlisted company is bad in law since the Joint APLs merely represents the estate of PDB and thus, had no rights to seek appointment of Directors in companies in which PDB was not a "Member". Further, without prejudice

M/S FINGROWTH COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/9/2020HC Rajasthan24 Aug 2023

Bench: AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH,SAMEER JAIN

1 and 2 companies and certain other individuals as Directors of 4 listed companies, 3 subsidiaries of one listed company and an unlisted company is bad in law since the Joint APLs merely represents the estate of PDB and thus, had no rights to seek appointment of Directors in companies in which PDB was not a "Member". Further, without prejudice