BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

17 results for “capital gains”+ Section 150clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai417Delhi274Jaipur123Ahmedabad106Bangalore90Chennai86Hyderabad70Cochin67Nagpur45Chandigarh36Indore35Raipur33Pune29Surat25Kolkata22Lucknow19SC17Cuttack14Amritsar12Rajkot10Guwahati10Visakhapatnam8Dehradun4Patna4Allahabad3Jodhpur2Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 8012Section 41(2)10Section 37(1)5Section 1505Section 325Section 1494Deduction4Addition to Income4Section 1483Capital Gains

THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX) vs. TIGER GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL II HOLDINGS

C.A. No.-000262-000262 - 2026Supreme Court15 Jan 2026

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

capital gain which could then be used to declare a special dividend to the shareholders of HTIL. We find no merit in this argument. 134. Firstly, the Tier I (Mauritius companies) were the indirect subsidiaries of HTIL who could have influenced the former to sell the shares of Indian companies in which event the gains would have arisen

K.M. SHARMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 13(7),NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

C.A. No.-007742-007742 - 1997Supreme Court11 Apr 2002
For Respondent: INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 13(7)NEW DELHI
Section 147Section 148Section 149
3
Exemption3
Depreciation3
Section 150
Section 150(1)
Section 18
Section 6

150 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The relevant facts necessary for deciding the legal question raised are as under: - 1. The appellant’s lands were acquired under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and an award was passed on 2.12.1967 by the Chief Commissioner of Delhi granting compensation in favour

TEA ESTATE INDIA (P) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

- 0Supreme Court26 Apr 1976
For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
Section 2Section 2(1)Section 2(3)

capital gain under section 12B of TT Co. for the assessment year 1949-SO, no other amount could be included in the computation of the accumulated profits available for distribution under section 2(6A) (c) of the Act. The Income-tax officer rejected this 149 contention and allowed only a deduction of Rs. 27,000 being payment on share premium

GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-008945-008945 - 2019Supreme Court22 Nov 2019

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 115QSection 143(2)Section 77A

capital gain is totally exempt, entire transaction used to escape the tax net. Thus to plug this loop hole in the statute, Section 115QA is introduced to provide that where shares are bought back at a price higher than the price at which those shares were issued then, balance amount will be treated as distribution of income to shareholder

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXTAMIL NADU- vs. , MADRAS VS KOTAGIRI INDUSTRIAL CO-OPERATIVETEA FACTORY LTD., KOTAGIRI

- 0Supreme Court05 Mar 1997
For Respondent: KOTAGIRI INDUSTRIAL CO-OPERATIVETEA FACTORY LTD., KOTAGIRI
Section 72Section 80

150/-. The Income Tax Officer first set off the losses of previous years that had been carried forward against the income and since the losses were in excess of the income, he held that no deduction was permissible under Section 80-P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ’the Act’). The said view of the Income

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX SHIMLA vs. M/S AARHAM SOFTRONICS

C.A. No.-001784-001784 - 2019Supreme Court20 Feb 2019

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

Section 80Section 80I

capital, in the assessment year relevant to the previous year. 16 “Substantial expansion” is defined in clause (ix) of sub-section (8) of Section 80-IC and it reads as under: "(ix) “Substantial expansion” means increase in the investment in the plant and machinery by at least fifty per cent of the book value of plant and machinery (before taking

GARDEN SILK WEAVING FACTORY, SURAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,GUJARAT, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals for both the assessment years

- 0Supreme Court22 Mar 1991
For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,GUJARAT, AHMEDABAD
Section 10(2)(vib)Section 32(2)

section 141 of the Act, was made accepting the income returned. Subsequently, the Income Tax Officer found that, for the assessment year in question, the assessee had made an income of Rs. 11,82,056 but deducted there-three figures aggregating to Rs.7,87,573 to arrive at the net income of Rs.3,94,483 which had been returned

UNIVERSAL RADIATORS, COIMBATORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TAMIL NADU

- 0Supreme Court30 Mar 1993
For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TAMIL NADU
Section 2(24)

150 1993 SCALE (2)393 ACT: Income Tax Act, 1961 : Sections 4 and 10(3). Assessee--Manufacturer of automobile radiators--Copper ingots booked from America--To be rolled in Bombay as and sheets and despatched to assessee for manufacture--Ship carrying goods seized by Pakistan--Insurance company paying value of goods in dollars--Devaluation of Indian rupee--The difference

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(CENTRAL) vs. M/S. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG.(WVG.)CO.LTD

The appeal is partly allowed

C.A. No.-002916-002916 - 1980Supreme Court29 Apr 1992
For Respondent: GWALIOR RAYON SILK MANUFACTURING CO. LTD
Section 256(1)Section 256(2)Section 32

Section 256(1) the High Court answered the question against the revenue. The High Court by order dated October 25, 1983 answered the question in favour of the assessee relying on its earlier decision reported in C.I.T. v. Bangalore Turf Club Ltd., (150 I.T.R. 23) Civil Appeal No. 1404 of 1991 The Commissioner of Income Tax ....Appellant . I.D.L. Chemicals

MANSAROVAR COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI

C.A. No.-005769-005769 - 2022Supreme Court10 Apr 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

Section 26Section 6(3)

capital gains in a particular case may tantamount to a failure in raising a substantial question of law in terms of Section 260A of the Act. However, the same may not apply on interest as the interest is automatic and mandatory. 4.14 Making above submissions and relying upon the aforesaid decisions, it is prayed that the present appeals be dismissed

SAHARANPUR ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD. ETC. ETC. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ETC.ETC

- 0Supreme Court15 Jan 1992
For Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ETC.ETC
Section 43

150 I.T.R. 95 (Pat.); C.I.T. v. Lonawalla Khandalla Electric Supply Co.Ltd.,(1985) 22 Taxman 77 (Bom.); C.I.T v. Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation Ltd., [1987] 166 I.T.R. 797 (Cal); C.I.T. v. Bassein Electric Supply Co. Ltd., (1989) 177 I.T.R. 482 (Ker.); C.I.T. v. Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. [1989] 179 I.T.R. 580 (Cal); and Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. v. C.I.T

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. UNITED PROVINCES ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO

In the result, appeal is allowed

C.A. No.-006325-006325 - 1995Supreme Court17 Apr 2000
For Respondent: UNITED PROVINCES ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY
Section 256(1)Section 32(1)Section 41(2)Section 6Section 7A

gains from business or profession by virtue of deeming fiction, but the receipts do not become business profits. He, therefore, submitted that notional receipt of profit is in the nature of capital receipt and as there is no provision or procedure in the Act for taxing it again after receipt of additional http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-008733-008734 - 2018Supreme Court02 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

section 30 of the Copyright Act, which transfers an interest in all or any of the rights contained in sections 14(a) and 14(b) of the Copyright Act, but is a “licence” which imposes restrictions or conditions for the use of computer software. Thus, it cannot be said that any of the EULAs that we are concerned with

2TATE BANK OF PATIALA, PATIALA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA

The appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-004270-004273 - 1996Supreme Court15 Mar 1996
For Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,PATIALA

150. The attempt to get the matter referred to the High Court was unsuccassful and so the assessee filed the special leave petition in this Court against tne order of the Appelate Tribunal. 5. All the 13 appeals involve conslderation of the same question between the same parties. So, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common

M/S APEX LABORATORIES P. LTD. vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT II

The appeal is dismissed without order on costs

C.A. No.-001554-001554 - 2022Supreme Court22 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 142(1)Section 37(1)

gains of business or profession”. [Explanation 1].—For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that any expenditure incurred by an assessee for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law shall not be deemed to have been incurred for the purpose of business or profession and no deduction or allowance shall be made

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

C.A. No.-021762-021762 - 2017Supreme Court19 Oct 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 12AA(1) of the IT Act, on 18.05.1979 and is engaged in the activity of promotion of the export of all kind of ready-made garments, knitwear, and garments made of leather, jute and hemp. It does not per se engage in any activity for profit, and its mandate is to ensure that Indian apparel manufacturers, are given forums

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAYCITY II vs. SHAKUNTALA AND TWO OTHERS ETC

- 0Supreme Court18 Jul 1961
For Respondent: SHAKUNTALA AND TWO OTHERS ETC

150 Nanalal Haridas and Tribhuvandas Haridas The Company was one in which the public were not substantially interested. For the assessment year 1949-50 the Income-tax Officer concerned applied the provisions of s. 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (as it stood previous to :the amendment of 1955) and ordered that the undistributed portion of the assessable