Skip to main content

Browse Tax Judgements

Showing 121140 of 183 judgements · Browse by section & bench

“Ask” finds judgements by meaning — try can amortisation of goodwill be treated as an operating expense?

Free to read — no signup required. Every judgement includes the facts, legal issues, outcome and related cases. Create a free account for AI chat, drafting and workspaces.

Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. ITO (TDS)-Ward-19(1)(3)

ITA No. 3205/Mum/2025 & ITA No. 3206/Mum/2025Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Mumbai7 Jan 2026

The appeals were filed by Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd. against the order of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-1, Ahmadabad, dated 16.10.2024, which in turn arises from the orders passed under section 201 by ITO(

Read summary

Bina Ghosh vs Income Tax Officer

ITA No. 5877/MUM/2025 & ITA No. 5878/MUM/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH, MUMBAI19 Jan 2026

The assessee, Bina Ghosh, did not file an income tax return for the financial year relevant to Assessment Year 2016-17 as she had no taxable income. Her husband purchased a residential property, and her name was included in the sale deed. T

Read summary

ITA No. 4754/Mum/2025

4754/Mum/2025Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench Mumbai13 Jan 2026

The assessee, Lodha Developers Limited, is a company engaged in real estate construction and development. For the assessment year 2016-17, the assessee filed its return of income electronically declaring a total income of Rs. 83,28,22,820/-

Read summary

ITA No.7390/Mum/2025

ITA No.7390/Mum/2025Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “G” Bench, Mumbai29 Jan 2026

The assessee, Sunjewels Private Limited, is a resident corporate entity engaged in the business of manufacturing gold and diamond studded jewellery for export. For the assessment year 2016-17, the assessee filed its return of income declari

Read summary

Aakash Value Realty Private Limited Vs. DCIT CC-1(2), Mumbai

ITA No.2560/Mum/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH, MUMBAI22 Jan 2026

The assessee, Aakash Value Realty Private Limited, a private limited company engaged in the business of builders and property developers, filed its original return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 declaring a total income of ₹33,45

Read summary

Sunblaze Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward 9(1)

ITA No.1788/KOL/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA6 Jan 2026

The assessee, Sunblaze Constructions Pvt. Ltd., received a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act on 29.06.2021 for the assessment year 2016-17. The extended period of limitation under the Taxation and Other Laws (Deduction and Amen

Read summary

Prabha Trading Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(1), Kolkata

I.T.A. No.: 2119/KOL/2024Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata ‘A’ Bench, Kolkata2 Sept 2025

The assessee, Prabha Trading Corporation, filed an income tax return for Assessment Year 2016-17 declaring a total income of Rs 236,280/-. The return was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS. The assessee is a distributor of paper for p

Read summary

Maruti Traders & Investors vs. ACIT, Circle-35, Kolkata

I.T.A. No.959/Kol/2025Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'SMC' Bench Kolkata1 Sept 2025

This appeal was filed by Maruti Traders & Investors against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A), Bhubaneswar dated 23.04.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal was directed against the disallowance

Read summary

Girish Kshanlal Sharma Vs ITO, Ward-34(1), Kolkata

ITA No.1405/Kol/2025Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata1 Sept 2025

This is an appeal filed by the assessee, Girish Kshanlal Sharma, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [CIT(A)] in appeal no. CIT(A), Kolkata-10/10312/2018-19 dated 05.09.2024 for ass

Read summary

Srivaru Agro Pvt. Ltd. (Successor to Manoj Mercantile Credit Pvt. Ltd.) Vs. A.C.I.T., CC-1(4), Kolkata

I.T.A. No.: 98/KOL/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA22 Oct 2025

The assessee, Srivaru Agro Pvt. Ltd. (Successor to Manoj Mercantile Credit Pvt. Ltd.), filed its original return of income electronically on 14.10.2016 showing ‘NIL’ income with a current year’s loss of ₹20,43,644/-. The case was selected f

Read summary

Shyamnagar Anchal SKUS Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Bankura

I.T.A. No.: 711/KOL/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA29 Oct 2025

The assessee, Shyamnagar Anchal SKUS Ltd., a Primary Agricultural Credit Society (PACS), did not file its return of income for the relevant assessment year. The Assessing Officer (AO) had information about huge transactions aggregating to ₹

Read summary

M/s. 45 Bus Route Owner Association Vs. ITO, Ward-33(2), Kolkata

I.T.A. No.: 272/KOL/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA13 Oct 2025

The assessee, M/s. 45 Bus Route Owner Association, did not file the return of income for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The case was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 due to high value transactions amounting to ₹77,01,650

Read summary

Dinesh Kumar Singhania Vs. I.T.O., Ward-34(1), Kolkata

I.T.A. No.: 1151/KOL/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA21 Oct 2025

The assessee, Dinesh Kumar Singhania, an individual, filed his return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 declaring a total income of ₹2,69,160/- under section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961. He reported a cash balance of ₹21,92,184

Read summary

Sanjay Goel HUF vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Kolkata

ITA No.1913/Kol/2025Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Kolkata7 Nov 2025

The assessee, Sanjay Goel HUF, filed a return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 declaring a total income of Rs.3,01,740/-. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee had transacted with M/s Ejecta Marketing Ltd., a penny stock co

Read summary

Mr. Suranjan Roy vs. ITO, Ward 62(1), Kolkata

I.T.A. No. 1681/Kol/2025Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC Bench, Kolkata7 Nov 2025

The assessee, Mr. Suranjan Roy, sold a residential house property on 25.09.2019 for Rs. 53,00,000/-. He purchased another residential house about one year before the date on which the transfer of the original property took place. The assess

Read summary

M/s R.S. Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Circle 11(3)

ITA No.1513/KOL/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA11 Nov 2025

The assessee, M/s R.S. Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., filed its return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 declaring a total income of ₹43,04,040/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessment was reopen

Read summary

Bijay Kumar Burnwal vs. Income Tax Officer

I.T.A. No. 2018/Kol/2025Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), SMC Bench, Kolkata7 Nov 2025

The case involves Bijay Kumar Burnwal, who faced an ex-parte assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO made additions under Section 50C (Rs. 13,83,232/-) and Section 56(2)(vi

Read summary

Rajendra Rampal Vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-23(1), Hooghly

ITA No.: 2167/KOL/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA8 Dec 2025

The assessee, Rajendra Rampal, filed his original return of income declaring income of Rs. 19,58,040/- on 27.05.2017 for the Assessment year 2016-17. According to SFT information, the owners of a piece of land and building executed a Joint

Read summary

P.N. Memorial Neuro Centre and Research Institute Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1)

ITA No.328/KOL/2025INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA2 Dec 2025

The assessee, P.N. Memorial Neuro Centre and Research Institute Ltd., filed its return of income on 12.09.2016, declaring a total income of ₹14,75,83,010/-. The case was selected for scrutiny, and statutory notices along with a questionnair

Read summary

Jaydip Dhar vs. Income Tax Officer

I.T.A. No.642/Kol/2025Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC Bench, Kolkata19 Dec 2025

The assessee, Jaydip Dhar, filed a return of income on 31.03.2017 declaring a total income of Rs. 3,03,720/-. His case was selected for limited scrutiny due to large cash deposits into his bank account. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued not

Read summary
Opakhya LogoOpakhya

AI-powered tax-litigation platform. Find precedents using natural language, draft submissions in minutes, and run your entire case repository from a single secure workspace.

© 2025 Opakhya. All rights reserved.

Core Features

Additional Features

  • Smart Comments
  • Export Options
  • Quick Copy
  • Analytics Dashboard
Version 2.0.1Last updated: October 2025
Powered by AI & Machine Learning