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.

7 results for “capital gains”+ Section 36(1)(via)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai318Delhi242Bangalore207Chennai98Jaipur93Ahmedabad81Chandigarh70Hyderabad55Kolkata51Pune43Guwahati31Panaji31Indore27Nagpur20Calcutta16Cuttack13Karnataka8Surat8Cochin8Telangana7SC6Visakhapatnam5Dehradun4Amritsar4Rajasthan3Rajkot3Lucknow3Varanasi3Raipur2Jodhpur2Ranchi1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 10B7Section 966Section 260A2

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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RAJAHMUNDRY vs. M/S.B.KRISHNA MURTHY KAKINADA AND 2 ORS

ITTA/93/2002HC Telangana10 Dec 2013

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

Section 260A

Section 9(1)(vi) of the Act, but the term “royalty” as defined and covered under Art VIII A of the DTAA. 7. Before we examine the relevant clauses of agreement dated 11th May, 1987 between HCL and ADC, it would be first appropriate to examine the ambit and scope of the term „royalty‟ taxable under Article VIIIA

THEE COMMSSR.OF INCOME TAX.HYD. vs. CHALLA SHANKER REDDY.HYD.

ITTA/80/2002HC Telangana13 Dec 2013

Bench: L.NARASIMHA REDDY,T.SUNIL CHOWDARY

Section 96

Capital Gains Tax and that the defendants are trying to take advantage of these documents for effecting fraudulent transfers- The ,Trial Court concluded that considerationdidnotpassundertheDevelopmentAgreementsandthat the Development Agreements were hence proved to be sham documents' TheTrialCourtalsoconcludedthatthesuitpropertieswereleasedorrtto i third parties under the registered Sale Deeds and that mesne profits cannot be granted to the plaintiffs pending demarcation of the shares

COMMR.OF I.T. RAJAHMUNDRY vs. M/S.NARAYANA CHOWDARYAND ORS KAKINADA

ITTA/82/2002HC Telangana10 Dec 2013

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

Section 96

Capital Gains Tax and that the defendants are trying to take advantage of these documents for effecting fraudulent transfers- The ,Trial Court concluded that considerationdidnotpassundertheDevelopmentAgreementsandthat the Development Agreements were hence proved to be sham documents' TheTrialCourtalsoconcludedthatthesuitpropertieswereleasedorrtto i third parties under the registered Sale Deeds and that mesne profits cannot be granted to the plaintiffs pending demarcation of the shares

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - (TDS), vs. M/s. Suman Chit Funds (P) Ltd.,

ITTA/120/2013HC Telangana27 Jun 2013
Section 96

Capital Gains Tax and that the defendants are trying to take advantage of these documents for effecting fraudulent transfers- The ,Trial Court concluded that considerationdidnotpassundertheDevelopmentAgreementsandthat the Development Agreements were hence proved to be sham documents' TheTrialCourtalsoconcludedthatthesuitpropertieswereleasedorrtto i third parties under the registered Sale Deeds and that mesne profits cannot be granted to the plaintiffs pending demarcation of the shares

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

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

The Commissioner of Income-tax(Exemptions) vs. WarangalWarangal Diocese Society

The appeals are dismissed, along with pending

ITTA/268/2019HC Telangana16 Nov 2023

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,N.TUKARAMJI

Section 37

VIA (Km 10+100 to Km 12+500) ("Works") b) The Respondent vide Offer letter dated 22.12.2000 sent its offer and the bid of the Respondent was accepted by the Appellant. c) The Appellant vide letter dated 17.01.2001 bearing No. IRCON/1007/Noida/Pkg-VIA/51 issued a Letter of Intent ("LOI") accepting the Respondent's offer for the abovementioned Works for a total value