Search: capital gains

3 results for “capital gains”+ Section 207clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 2(47)4 Section 56(2)(vii)3 Section 271(1)(c)3 Addition to Income3 Section 143(3)2 Section 452 Capital Gains2 Long Term Capital Gains2

VENKATARAM SPINNING MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

In the result, assessee appeal is partly allowed

ITA 87/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Balakrishnan. Sassessment Year: 2017-18 Venkataram Spinning Mills Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), Private Limited, Guntur. Guntur. Pan : Aafcv2151H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Ar. Revenue By: Shri Ld.Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit- Dr. Date Of Hearing: 20.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ld.DR. Satyasai Rath, CIT-

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 45

gain u/s 2(14)(iii) of the Act. It was submitted that ‘capital region’ is similar to municipality / township / cantonment area “or by any other name” include the capital region also. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Section 2(14)(iii) (a) and (b) of the Act provides as under : Section

VENKATARAM SPINNING MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

VENKATARAM SPINNING MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI Y VENKANA CHOUDARY,, VISAKHAPATNAM

CHAGANTI SATYANARAYANA,,NARSAPUR vs. THE ITO,, PALAKOL