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.

3 results for “capital gains”+ Section 10A(2)(ia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore91Mumbai70Delhi56Ahmedabad22Pune20Hyderabad19Kolkata17Calcutta16Chennai13Amritsar7Jaipur7Karnataka4Indore4Rajkot4Telangana3Rajasthan2Varanasi2Visakhapatnam2Chandigarh2Dehradun1SC1Surat1Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 10B7Section 1O3Exemption2

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. M/s Matrix Power Pvt Ltd.,

ITTA/386/2013HC Telangana03 Sept 2013
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 260A

capital gains). Under section 72, a provision has been made for carry forward and setting off of a loss sustained against the head of profits and gains of business or profession. Under section 72, where a loss which has been sustained under the head of profits and gains of business or profession cannot be set-off against income under

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMEE TAX-III vs. M/S.V.B.C.FERRO ALLOYS LTD

THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED

ITTA/506/2006HC Telangana15 Oct 2024

Bench: SUJOY PAUL,NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

Sri J.V. prasad (Sr. SC FOR TNCOME TAX)
For Appellant:
For Respondent: Sri Challa Gunaranjan
Section 1Section 1OSection 260

IA; (d) "long -tenn finance" shall haue ther meaning assigned to it in clause(Viii) of sub-section (1) of section 36, IV. Finance Act 1999 introduced the follouing fufther Explanation: " Explanation 2.- For the remoual of doubts, it is herebg declared that ang income bg uag of diuidends, interest or long-term capital gains of an infrastntcture capital fund

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/3/2020HC Telangana25 Aug 2020

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

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