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.

5 results for “capital gains”+ Section 276clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi394Mumbai331Bangalore132Karnataka110Kolkata68Jaipur63Ahmedabad62Chennai55Indore18Calcutta17Rajkot12Chandigarh12Nagpur11Amritsar10SC10Hyderabad8Guwahati7Pune7Visakhapatnam6Surat5Telangana5Rajasthan3Dehradun2Lucknow2Cochin2Cuttack2Andhra Pradesh1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Jodhpur1Orissa1Patna1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

Key Topics

Section 8019Section 80H3Section 2763Section 80I2Section 1312Section 3022Section 3642Section 2012Long Term Capital Gains2Search & Seizure

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Supriya Wines

ITTA/591/2017HC Telangana07 Nov 2017

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 276Section 276C(1)

Capital Gain is bogus. (iii).It has been further alleged that even subsequent to the said search, 3 false statement was made by the petitioner on examination on oath under section 131(1A) of the Act. (iv).It has been further alleged that the petitioner had even attempted to evade tax which attracts offence under section 276

PRL COMMR OF INCOME TAX-2, HYDERABAD vs. K RAVINDER REDDY, HYDERABAD

In the result, this Cr.M.P

ITTA/590/2017HC Telangana
2
23 Aug 2018

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Section 271(1)(c)Section 276Section 482

Section 276 C of the Income Tax Act. It is next submitted that the statement of the petitioner recorded during the course of search and seizure operation cannot be termed to be false until and unless an adjudication order is passed contrary to the statement made by the petitioner declaring that profit from long term capital gain

INCOME TAX BANGALORE vs. SHALINI BHUPAL

Appeal is dismissed

ITTA/38/2000HC Telangana20 Jun 2013
Section 260Section 80Section 80HSection 80ISection 80J

capital of not less than five hundred thousand rupees; (iii) the hotel is for the time being approved for the purposes of this sub-section by the Central Government; (iv) the business of the hotel starts functioning after the 31st day of March, 1981, but before the 1st day of April [1991]. [(4A) This section applies to the business

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. Shri Raaj Kumar Jain

ITTA/147/2013HC Telangana28 Jun 2013
For Appellant: - Sri Yug Mohit Chaudhary assistedFor Respondent: - A.G.A., Sri Amit Mishra, Sri Gyan
Section 156(3)Section 201Section 302Section 363Section 364Section 366Section 376

Section 27 begins with a proviso and states that when any fact is deposed to as discovered, in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered may be proved, 49 whether it amounts to a confession

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

Section 178 of the Companies Act, 2013. Therefore, the Chairman of the company, HVL cannot arrogate unto himself the power to cause such appointment when such power ultimately rests with the Board of Directors. The observation of the two Joint APLs that the evident performance of BCrL, the flagship company of MP Birla Group is deteriorating ever since, HVL became