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.

27 results for “house property”+ Long Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,870Delhi1,348Bangalore619Chennai483Kolkata288Jaipur265Hyderabad218Ahmedabad182Karnataka138Pune128Cochin99Indore85Chandigarh71Surat56Calcutta55Raipur54Nagpur44Lucknow32Patna30Telangana27Rajkot24Visakhapatnam23Cuttack23Guwahati23SC17Agra16Amritsar14Jodhpur7Varanasi7Dehradun7Allahabad7Ranchi5Rajasthan3Jabalpur3Andhra Pradesh1Kerala1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Panaji1Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 260A10Section 54F10Section 10(20)10Section 80P(2)(a)8Exemption8Deduction8Section 12A6Capital Gains6Section 271(1)(c)5

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Nara Constructions,

ITTA/672/2017HC Telangana15 Nov 2017

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

Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)

gains of business or profession" (before making any deduction under this clause) carried to such reserve account: Provided that where the aggregate of the amounts carried to such reserve account from time to time exceeds twice the amount of the paid up share capital and of the general reserves of the specified entity, no allowance under this clause shall

Sri Damodarlal Badruka vs. The Income Tax Officer

The appeal is allowed but in the circumstances with

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

Business Income5
Section 464
Section 2604
ITTA/299/2003
HC Telangana
17 Mar 2015

Bench: A RAMALINGESWARA RAO,DILIP B. BHOSALE

Section 45Section 54

house. 6. On 17th December, 1992 the Assessee entered into an agreement for sale of two of the flats from her share in the property to close family friends. In the return filed for the AY 1993-94 she declared Rs. 11,55,802/- as long term capital gain

M/S.R.S.RANGADAS vs. THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are disposed of, with no order as to costs

ITTA/406/2005HC Telangana19 Oct 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 2(47)Section 271(1)(c)Section 45(1)Section 48Section 54F

long term capital gain‟ the assessee had disclosed transfer consideration of Rs.5 Crores on sale of one lakh equity shares of NIIT to M/s Glad Investment Pvt. Ltd. („M/s GIPL‟ for short). Date of transfer declared was 14th August, 1997. The assessee had claimed deduction under Section 54F of Rs.5 Crores on account of having purchased immovable property 5, Golf

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Sri Anand Prakash Sanghi

ITTA/33/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

For Appellant: M/S.HARBOUR VIEWFor Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 2(47)(v)Section 260ASection 269USection 53A

gains can be computed under Section 45. Electricity and phone connections were taken by M/s.MAPL with the intention to start business, which was a non starter, and ultimately ended up in rescission of contract. The learned counsel for the assessee points out that there is no recital in the agreement for sale produced at Annexures-A and B regarding possession

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

ITTA/127/2025HC Telangana12 Feb 2025

Bench: The Learned

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 260ASection 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

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Sri R.Gowsreesham,

The appeals stand allowed leaving the

ITTA/296/2011HC Telangana29 Feb 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

terms as may be considered fit. (vi) “To Carry on the business of Hotel keepers, owners of restaurants," lodging and boarding house keepers and as owners of restaurants.” 7. Insofar as the other asseessee Chero Medico & Developers Pvt. Ltd.; the MoA indicates following objects which are extracted below:- I. To acquire and take over as a going concern the businesses

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV, vs. M/s. Maheshwari Plaza Resorts (P) Ltd.,

The appeals stand allowed leaving the

ITTA/281/2011HC Telangana29 Feb 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

terms as may be considered fit. (vi) “To Carry on the business of Hotel keepers, owners of restaurants," lodging and boarding house keepers and as owners of restaurants.” 7. Insofar as the other asseessee Chero Medico & Developers Pvt. Ltd.; the MoA indicates following objects which are extracted below:- I. To acquire and take over as a going concern the businesses

The Commissioner of Income Tax I vs. M/S Alloy Nitrides Limited,

The appeals stand allowed leaving the

ITTA/297/2011HC Telangana29 Feb 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

terms as may be considered fit. (vi) “To Carry on the business of Hotel keepers, owners of restaurants," lodging and boarding house keepers and as owners of restaurants.” 7. Insofar as the other asseessee Chero Medico & Developers Pvt. Ltd.; the MoA indicates following objects which are extracted below:- I. To acquire and take over as a going concern the businesses

The Commissioner of Income Tax -IV vs. M/s. Meghadoot Drillers

The appeals stand allowed leaving the

ITTA/295/2011HC Telangana22 Nov 2011

terms as may be considered fit. (vi) “To Carry on the business of Hotel keepers, owners of restaurants," lodging and boarding house keepers and as owners of restaurants.” 7. Insofar as the other asseessee Chero Medico & Developers Pvt. Ltd.; the MoA indicates following objects which are extracted below:- I. To acquire and take over as a going concern the businesses

Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. Agricultural Market Committee

The appeals stand allowed leaving the

ITTA/418/2011HC Telangana17 Nov 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

terms as may be considered fit. (vi) “To Carry on the business of Hotel keepers, owners of restaurants," lodging and boarding house keepers and as owners of restaurants.” 7. Insofar as the other asseessee Chero Medico & Developers Pvt. Ltd.; the MoA indicates following objects which are extracted below:- I. To acquire and take over as a going concern the businesses

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

The appeals stand allowed leaving the

ITTA/417/2011HC Telangana17 Nov 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

terms as may be considered fit. (vi) “To Carry on the business of Hotel keepers, owners of restaurants," lodging and boarding house keepers and as owners of restaurants.” 7. Insofar as the other asseessee Chero Medico & Developers Pvt. Ltd.; the MoA indicates following objects which are extracted below:- I. To acquire and take over as a going concern the businesses

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

The appeals stand allowed leaving the

ITTA/415/2011HC Telangana17 Nov 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

terms as may be considered fit. (vi) “To Carry on the business of Hotel keepers, owners of restaurants," lodging and boarding house keepers and as owners of restaurants.” 7. Insofar as the other asseessee Chero Medico & Developers Pvt. Ltd.; the MoA indicates following objects which are extracted below:- I. To acquire and take over as a going concern the businesses

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

The appeals stand allowed leaving the

ITTA/414/2011HC Telangana17 Nov 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

terms as may be considered fit. (vi) “To Carry on the business of Hotel keepers, owners of restaurants," lodging and boarding house keepers and as owners of restaurants.” 7. Insofar as the other asseessee Chero Medico & Developers Pvt. Ltd.; the MoA indicates following objects which are extracted below:- I. To acquire and take over as a going concern the businesses

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

ITTA/251/2008HC Telangana01 Mar 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

For Respondent: Ms. K.Lalitha, Standing Counsel for
Section 10(20)Section 10(29)Section 12ASection 260ASection 4Section 4(1)

long as the dominant object is of general public utility, it cannot be said that the said trust/institution is not established for charitable purposes. In Market Committee, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, after considering the provisions of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 (Punjab Act, for brevity), held that the market committee incorporated in terms of Section

Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur. vs. Agricultural Market Committee, Kangiri.

ITTA/318/2008HC Telangana01 Mar 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

For Respondent: Ms. K.Lalitha, Standing Counsel for
Section 10(20)Section 10(29)Section 12ASection 260ASection 4Section 4(1)

long as the dominant object is of general public utility, it cannot be said that the said trust/institution is not established for charitable purposes. In Market Committee, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, after considering the provisions of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 (Punjab Act, for brevity), held that the market committee incorporated in terms of Section

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

terms of the completion certificate issued by the NDMC, the LGF was sanctioned as „storage.‟ It was for this reason that the buyers lost interest. The Assessee then decided to return the advance received and also compensate the buyers since the buyers‟ funds had remained with the Assessee for some time. The Assessee had sought to explain that this compensation

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Kokivenkateswara Reddy AND others,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITTA/210/2003HC Telangana21 Jun 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

Section 260

terms of the completion certificate issued by the NDMC, the LGF was sanctioned as „storage.‟ It was for this reason that the buyers lost interest. The Assessee then decided to return the advance received and also compensate the buyers since the buyers‟ funds had remained with the Assessee for some time. The Assessee had sought to explain that this compensation

Commissioner of Income Tax-V, vs. Sri Vinod Krishna Conjeevaram,

The appeal is dismissed

ITTA/594/2013HC Telangana10 Dec 2013
Section 2(47)Section 260Section 45Section 45(4)Section 68

House, 1st Main, Mahalakshmi Layout Extn., Bangalore-560 086. ...RESPONDENT (By Sri A Shankar and Sri M Lava, Advocates) -0-0-0-0-0- This ITA is filed under Section 260-A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of Order dated 31.7.2013 passed in ITA No.764/Bang/2012 for the Assessment Year 2008- 09 to decide the foregoing question

SMT. SHANTHA VIDYASAGAR ANNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2) HYDERABAD

In the result, the orders dated 09

ITTA/527/2006HC Telangana07 Jan 2025

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

Section 144Section 148Section 2Section 260Section 260ASection 53Section 54F

long term capital gain arising out of the transaction at Rs. l3,7g,gOO/_. The assessee submittecL a reply on 03.04.200 l, wherein it was stated that the built_u1r area was received from the builder from the year 1999 on.vards and therefore, the relevant financial year through which capital gain arose was l99g_99, relevarrt for the assessment year

Commissioner of Income Tax -II vs. The Agrasen Coop. Urban Bank Ltd.,

In the result, for the above reasons, these appeals fail and

ITTA/711/2006HC Telangana07 Jun 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

Section 260ASection 46Section 80P(2)(a)

property and Rs.83,60,46,867/- as income from the business of banking. The assessee claimed deduction of business income under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act. The assessing officer, namely, the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax took up the return for scrutiny and found that the assessee had Rs.61,87,16,546/- as statutory reserve