← All Phrases

“Section 24(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 24Section 24(2)49 judgments

VIACOM 18, MEDIA PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. PCIT-8, MUMBAI

ITA 2591/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agarwal/Ms. MokshaFor Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 32

carried forward to the following year and set off against the profits and gains of the same business, profession or vocation under section 24(2) has to be determined by the ITO who deals with the assessment of the subsequent year. It is for the ITO dealing with the assessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE BARNALA vs. LAKHVIR SINGH, GRAIN MARKET, BARNALA

ITA 245/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: \nShri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ “ए”, चण्डीगढ़\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH\nHEARING

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(5), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH vs. AVTAR SINGH, VILLAGE- KAIMBWALA

ITA 615/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ “ए”, चण्डीगढ़\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH\nHEARING

SH. PARGAT SINGH,PANIPAT vs. ITO, WARD -1, KAITHAL

ITA 180/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: \nShri Navdeep Monga, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ “ए”, चण्डीगढ़\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH\nHEARING

M/S YOGRAJ CHAUDHARY,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-5, YAMUNA NAGAR

ITA 116/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, चण्डीगढ़ न्यायपीठ “ए”, चण्डीगढ़\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH\nHEARING

MANOJ SURESH TATOOSKAR,PUNE vs. CIRCLE 1(1) , PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1729/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri R.Y. Balawade
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

carrying on that business. When a partnership carries on a business each partner thereof carried on that business. The language used in section 24(2) requires that the business should be continued to be carried on by the individual concerned. The requirements of that section are satisfied when a partner

DCIT, CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI vs. BANSAL STEELS POWER LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross

ITA 4891/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4891/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2018-19 बनाम Dcit, Bansal Steels Power Ltd. Circle 4(1), Vs. 35, Jhandewalan, Motia Khan, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacg1010F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Co No.230/Del/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No.4891/Del/2024) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 बनाम Bansal Steels Power Ltd. Dcit, 35, Jhandewalan, Motia Khan, Vs. Circle 4(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacg1010F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 2Section 79Section 79(2)(c)

ITA No.4891/Del/2024 & CO No.230/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD

OM PRAKASH GUPTA,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JAIPUR

ITA 400/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR &
Section 115BSection 153ASection 69

nNotices issued u/s 24(1) of the PBPT Act to Shri Ram Singh Meena and served\nupon him as per the provisions of section 24(2) of the PBPT Act despite ample\nopportunities given.\nThe year in which lands were sold on behalf of Shri Ram Singh Meena, income\nfrom

OM PRAKASH GUPTA,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JAIPUR

ITA 399/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR &
Section 115BSection 153ASection 69

nNotices issued u/s 24(1) of the PBPT Act to Shri Ram Singh Meena and served\nupon him as per the provisions of section 24(2) of the PBPT Act despite ample\nopportunities given.\n\nThe year in which lands were sold on behalf of Shri Ram Singh Meena, income ... nNotices issued u/s 24(1) of the PBPT Act to Shri Ram Singh Meena and served\nupon him as per the provisions of section 24(2) of the PBPT Act despite ample\nopportunities given.\n\nThe year in which lands were sold on behalf of Shri Ram Singh Meena, income

OM PRAKASH GUPTA,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JAIPUR

ITA 397/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR &
Section 115BSection 153ASection 69

nNotices issued u/s 24(1) of the PBPT Act to Shri Ram Singh Meena and served\nupon him as per the provisions of section 24(2) of the PBPT Act despite ample\nopportunities given.\n\nThe year in which lands were sold on behalf of Shri Ram Singh Meena, income

OM PRAKASH GUPTA,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

ITA 396/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR &
Section 153ASection 69

Notices issued u/s 24(1) of the PBPT Act to Shri Ram Singh Meena and served upon him as per the provisions of section 24(2) of the PBPT Act despite ample opportunities given. The year in which lands were sold on behalf of Shri Ram Singh Meena, income from

OM PRAKASH GUPTA,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JAIPUR

ITA 395/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR &
Section 153ASection 69

Notices issued u/s 24(1) of the PBPT Act to Shri Ram Singh Meena and served upon him as per the provisions of section 24(2) of the PBPT Act despite ample opportunities given. The year in which lands were sold on behalf of Shri Ram Singh Meena, income from

CLASSIC MALL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5320/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, CIT DR &
Section 143(3)Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)

allow benefits of vacancy to the assessee for house property remaining vacant for whole of the year, unlike provisions contained in erstwhile section 24(2)(ix). This intent is factored in the provisions contained in section 23(1)(c). 7. From the perusal of page 13 of the impugned assessment

ASIA INVESTMENT CORPORATION (MAURITIUS) LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INT TAXATION)1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for both the years under consideration stands partly allowed

ITA 2766/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)(b)Section 69Section 74

Indian Income- tax Act, 1922. If the 'total income' is a loss, it has to be carried forward subject to the provisions of section 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and cannot be set off against any income which does not form part of the 'total income

ASIA INVESTMENT CORPORATION (MAURITIUS ) LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INT TAX)-1(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for both the years under consideration stands partly allowed

ITA 2765/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)(b)Section 69Section 74

Indian Income- tax Act, 1922. If the 'total income' is a loss, it has to be carried forward subject to the provisions of section 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and cannot be set off against any income which does not form part of the 'total income

DCIT (IT) - 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ROBECO INSTITUTIONEEL EMERGING MARKETS FONDS , MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4059/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit (It)-4(1)(1), Robeco Institutioneel Emerging Markets 625, Kautilya Bhavan, G-Block, Fonds, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 14Th Floor, Mumbai-400051. The Ruby, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Pan No. Aacts 7682 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2021-22 Dcit (It)-4(1)(1), Robeco Q1 Institutional Emerging 625, Kautilya Bhavan, G-Block, Markets Enhanced Index Equities Fund, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, 14Th Floor, The Rc/O Ernst & Young Mumbai-400051. Llp, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Pan No. Aabtr 2305 L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: None
Section 74

against the profits and against the profits and gains of the subsequent year under section gains of the subsequent year under section 24(2) has to be determined by the Income tax officer who deals 24(2) has to be determined by the Income tax officer who deals 24(2 ... carried forward 24*. If the 'total income' is a loss, it has to be carried forward subject to the provisions of section 24(2)* and cannot be set off subject to the provisions of section 24(2)* and cannot be set off subject to the provisions of section 24(2

DCIT (IT) 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ROBECO QI INSTITUTIONAL EMERGING MARKETS ENHANCED INDEX EQUITIES FUND, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4058/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit (It)-4(1)(1), Robeco Institutioneel Emerging Markets 625, Kautilya Bhavan, G-Block, Fonds, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 14Th Floor, Mumbai-400051. The Ruby, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Pan No. Aacts 7682 L Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2021-22 Dcit (It)-4(1)(1), Robeco Q1 Institutional Emerging 625, Kautilya Bhavan, G-Block, Markets Enhanced Index Equities Fund, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, 14Th Floor, The Rc/O Ernst & Young Mumbai-400051. Llp, 29 Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400028. Pan No. Aabtr 2305 L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: None
Section 74

against the profits and against the profits and gains of the subsequent year under section gains of the subsequent year under section 24(2) has to be determined by the Income tax officer who deals 24(2) has to be determined by the Income tax officer who deals 24(2 ... carried forward 24*. If the 'total income' is a loss, it has to be carried forward subject to the provisions of section 24(2)* and cannot be set off subject to the provisions of section 24(2)* and cannot be set off subject to the provisions of section 24(2

REKHA KISHORE BARI,DHULE vs. ASSESSING OFFICER-NFAC, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1667/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1667/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Rekha Kishore Bari, V The Assessing Officer- Datta Bari Bhavan, S Nfac. Opp.Rana Pratap Statute, Dhule – 424001. Pan: Abepb3597J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani – Ar Revenue By Shri Sandeep P Sathe – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 09/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] For Assessment Year 2020-21 Dated 19.07.2024 Passed U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Emanating From The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Act, Dated 31/08/2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 3GSection 56(2)

paid under RFCTLARR. 4.4. However, since the moot question is whether RFCTLARR applies to the case of Appellant. It is pertinent to refer section 24(2) of the RFCTLARR (pg.6 of legal paper book), which provides that cases where compensation for land acquisition is not paid till commencement of RFCTLARR

TVF FUND LTD., MAURITIUS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-4(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 4632/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

Section 153Section 74Section 90(2)

Indian Income- tax Act, 1922. If the 'total income' is a loss, it has to be carried forward subject to the provisions of section 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and cannot be set off against any income which does not form part of the 'total income

NARMADA INN,BESIDE SHUBH MOTORS, KATRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MANDLA WARD, MANDLA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 135/JAB/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur08 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2017-18 Narmada Inn, V. Income Tax Officer, Beside Shubh Motors, Katra, Mandla Ward, Mp-481661. Mandla, Mp-481661. Pan:Aagfn9764J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri H. S. Modh, Adv Respondent By: Shri Bharat Sheogankar, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 07 01 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 01 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri H. S. Modh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Sheogankar, Sr. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 24(2)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH “SMC”, JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT Assessment Year: 2017-18

Showing 1–20 of 49 · Page 1 of 3

Section 24(2) — 49 judgments | BharatTax | BharatTax