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.

6 results for “capital gains”+ Disallowanceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,880Delhi3,397Chennai1,575Bangalore1,326Kolkata1,083Ahmedabad695Jaipur454Hyderabad412Pune347Indore191Chandigarh176Cochin142Raipur129Surat110Nagpur108Lucknow101Visakhapatnam66Rajkot66Panaji55SC49Karnataka44Amritsar39Calcutta39Guwahati38Cuttack37Dehradun26Agra26Jodhpur25Jabalpur21Ranchi20Patna19Kerala15Allahabad9Orissa7Punjab & Haryana7Telangana6Rajasthan3Varanasi3Himachal Pradesh1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Gauhati1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 260A5Section 54F5Section 2605Disallowance4Capital Gains3Deduction3Section 10(38)2Section 43B2Section 1472Section 143(3)

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III, vs. M/S. SAVIJANA SEA FOODS PVT. LTD.,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITTA/55/2010HC Telangana20 Dec 2024

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

Section 260

disallowed as capital expenditure/loss as it had not been paid for business purposes. 5. By a reply dated 15th December 1997 the Assessee contended that the space to be sold was in its stock and trade. The space allotted to various persons had been surrendered by them for various reasons. Such persons who surrendered had insisted that since they

The Commissioner of Income Tax(Central) vs. M/s.Madhu Enterprises

ITTA/127/2025HC Telangana12 Feb 2025

Bench: The Learned

Section 132Section 143(3)
2
Section 153A2
Addition to Income2
Section 147
Section 148
Section 153A
Section 260A
Section 54F

gain on transfer of certain capital assets not to be charged in case of investment in residential house. *** *** *** Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply where.– (a) the assessee,– (i) owns more than one residential house, other than the new asset, on the date of the transfer of the original asset; or” 14. The AO held that

Sri Natakari Gopal vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and 2 Others

ITTA/238/2022HC Telangana18 Aug 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 3Rd January, 2023. Appearance : Mr. Tilak Mita, Adv. ..For Appellant Mr. Pranit Bag , Adv. Mr. A. K. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Debdatta Saha, Adv. …For Respondent Re: Ga/1/2022 The Court:- Heard Mr. Tilak Mitra, Learned Advocate For The Appellant & Mr. Pranit Bag, Learned Advocate For The Respondent. There Is A Delay Of 1126 Days In Filing The Appeal. Though The Reasons Given In The Affidavit Are Not Convincing The Issues Involved In The Appeal Had Been Decided By This Court In Earlier Matters, This Court Exercises Discretion & Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal. Accordingly, The Application Is Allowed.

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 260A

Capital gain of Rs.1,12,13,010/- and claim the same as exempted from income tax u/s 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, giving rise thereby to the vice of perversity in the process of decision making ? 2. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in deleting the disallowances

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. GLAND PHARMA LTD.,

In the result, the appeal (ITAT/96/2017) fails and stands

ITTA/96/2017HC Telangana09 Apr 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 260ASection 43B

capital gains and not business profit and its purported findings in this regard are arbitrary, unreasonable and perverse?” We have heard Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, learned Counsel for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Asim Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. 3 On going through the order passed by the tribunal, we find that the tribunal was considering six issues

Kuchipudi Krishna Kishore vs. The DCIT

Accordingly the appeals deserves to be allowed by setting aside the impugned

ITTA/291/2007HC Telangana03 May 2024

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,N.TUKARAMJI

For Appellant: SRI A.V.A. SIVA KARTIKEYA on behalf ofFor Respondent: SRI ARVIND rep Ms. SUNDARI R PISUPATI
Section 260

disallowance of the assessee claimed for deduction. Further the aspect raised by the appellant I 6 l'il.l\\IIil tIl \. :rl.:'):Ntrt ji'- was discussed and determined threadbare by the forums below Hence no tenable ground is made out for interference in appeal. 10. The submissions of the learned counsel are duly considered and the materials on record are perused

AVANTI FEEDS LTD., vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX

The appeal is dismissed, and the stay petition

ITTA/56/2011HC Telangana06 Jan 2026

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

Section 260A

Capital Loss Claims’ information data provided by the Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata? ii. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Tribunal was justified in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee and deleting the disallowance of a fictitious loss on trading of penny scrips of BLUE CIRCLE & CCL INTERNATIONAL aggregating