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.

48 results for “house property”+ Section 159clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi553Karnataka455Mumbai344Bangalore211Jaipur114Hyderabad80Cochin62Kolkata56Ahmedabad48Raipur40Telangana38Chennai36Lucknow35Chandigarh26Nagpur24Pune23Indore23Calcutta16Guwahati16Cuttack16Agra11SC10Rajkot9Surat8Rajasthan5Varanasi4Jodhpur3Allahabad3Amritsar2Orissa2D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Jabalpur1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Addition to Income32Section 13227Section 14823Section 115J18Section 143(3)17Disallowance17Transfer Pricing15Section 139(1)14Deduction

ABDULVAHED A. SHEIKH, LEGAL HEIROF LATE SMT. SARIFABEN BIKHUBHAI SHEK,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 2948/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri A.C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr. D.R
Section 120(3)(a)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 282Section 54F

property during the year along with other Co-owners and his share in the transaction was Rs. 35,79,625/- ,but no return of income had been filed by the asseseee. Subsequently assessment was framed , subjecting the Long Term Capital Gain earned thereon, amounting to Rs. 32,63,644/-, to tax by taking the assessee’s share as the sale

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3

14
Penalty12
Section 801B(10)10
Section 142(1)10

DCIT CIRCLE-3(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ALPESHKUMAR C.PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1991/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh CIT. D.R with Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 41(1)Section 54F

housing loan available to the assessee but the same was not utilized for the purpose of the investment in the property. In this connection we note that the AO has made charts for different assessment years in which the assessee has sold different lands. These charts are available on pages 51 and 52 of the assessment order. The allegation that

SHRI NARENDRA B. PATEL,,SABARKANTHA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, HIMATNAGAR

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

ITA 3153/AHD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3153/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Narendra B. Patel, I.T.O., 592, Pampaliva Vas, Vs. Ward-2, Moyad, Himatnagar. Sabarkantha-383110. Pan: Asupp6989M

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 68Section 69

House 6 DevaDhai Patel Bank of 006906 10,41,488/- India. Salal 1/3/201 1 12.5 The assessee in support of the impugned transaction as discussed above has furnished the confirmation from the parties along with their PAN numbers and party wise/ date wise payment to vendor along with cheque details. Accordingly the assessee, contended that the impugned transactions were carried

SHRI POPATBHAI BHUDARBHAI PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-6(1)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 493/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 68

house property, capital gain and from other sources. The Assessing Officer observed that during the year under consideration, the assessee purchased property at Rs.50,00,000/-. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish the source of investment in property for which the assessee vide letter dated 12.08.2016 submitted the source of the funds as well as confirmation from

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MUSTUFAMIYA HUSSENMIYAN SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1888/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri V Nandakumar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kshatriya, AR and Shri Alay Anil Kshatriya, AR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 69

house property & income from other sources. The assessee filed original return on 16.12.2020 u/s 139(1) of the Act declaring total income at Rs. 1,25,74,590/-. The same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 12.11.2021. A search action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of MHS Group

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MUSTUFAMIYA HUSSENMIYAN SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1889/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri V Nandakumar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kshatriya, AR and Shri Alay Anil Kshatriya, AR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 69

house property & income from other sources. The assessee filed original return on 16.12.2020 u/s 139(1) of the Act declaring total income at Rs. 1,25,74,590/-. The same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 12.11.2021. A search action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of MHS Group

FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHEIKH LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHEIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 679/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

house property and income from other sources. For the asst. year 2020-21 the assessee filed his original Return of Income u/s.139(1) of the Act on 16.12.2020 declaring total income of Rs.44,19,940/-. The assessee died on 06-05-2021 and is represented by his wife as the Legal representative. There was a search action u/s.132

FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHEIK LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHEIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 680/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

house property and income from other sources. For the asst. year 2020-21 the assessee filed his original Return of Income u/s.139(1) of the Act on 16.12.2020 declaring total income of Rs.44,19,940/-. The assessee died on 06-05-2021 and is represented by his wife as the Legal representative. There was a search action u/s.132

FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHEIKH LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHEIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 681/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

house property and income from other sources. For the asst. year 2020-21 the assessee filed his original Return of Income u/s.139(1) of the Act on 16.12.2020 declaring total income of Rs.44,19,940/-. The assessee died on 06-05-2021 and is represented by his wife as the Legal representative. There was a search action u/s.132

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHAIKH WIFE & LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 871/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

house property and income from other sources. For the asst. year 2020-21 the assessee filed his original Return of Income u/s.139(1) of the Act on 16.12.2020 declaring total income of Rs.44,19,940/-. The assessee died on 06-05-2021 and is represented by his wife as the Legal representative. There was a search action u/s.132

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHAIKH WIFE & LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 873/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

house property and income from other sources. For the asst. year 2020-21 the assessee filed his original Return of Income u/s.139(1) of the Act on 16.12.2020 declaring total income of Rs.44,19,940/-. The assessee died on 06-05-2021 and is represented by his wife as the Legal representative. There was a search action u/s.132

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHAIKH WIFE & LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 872/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

house property and income from other sources. For the asst. year 2020-21 the assessee filed his original Return of Income u/s.139(1) of the Act on 16.12.2020 declaring total income of Rs.44,19,940/-. The assessee died on 06-05-2021 and is represented by his wife as the Legal representative. There was a search action u/s.132

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1129/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R
Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

159 taxman 22 wherein it was held as under: “7. This Court has time and again taken the view that there must be some consistency in the stand of the revenue and they cannot pick and choose cases in which to file an appeal ITA nos.939 & 1129/AHD/2019 With C.O.Nos. 167 & 181/Ahd/2019 Asstt. Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 17 in respect

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. TROIKAA PHARMACEUTICLAS LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 939/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 939 & 1129/Ahd/2019 With C.O.Nos.169 & 181/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 D.C.I.T., Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Circle-4(1)(2), Vs. Commerce House-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Rajvansh Apartment, Judges Bunglow Road, Ahmedabad-380054. Pan: Aabct0228K

For Appellant: Shri Dhiren Shah, with Shri Karan Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Alokkumar, CIT.D.R
Section 37Section 37(1)Section 80I

159 taxman 22 wherein it was held as under: “7. This Court has time and again taken the view that there must be some consistency in the stand of the revenue and they cannot pick and choose cases in which to file an appeal ITA nos.939 & 1129/AHD/2019 With C.O.Nos. 167 & 181/Ahd/2019 Asstt. Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 17 in respect

TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1285/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1285 & 1286/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & Ita No.1396 & 1397/Ahd/2018 Asstt.Year 2011-12 & 2012-13 Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent House Ahmedabad. Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1327 & 1328/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1414 & 1415/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Acit, Circle-4(1)(2) Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Ahmedabad. Torrent House Vs. Off.Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi, With Shri Biren Shah, Ars. Revenue By : Shri Mohd. Usman, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23/11/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, With Shri Biren Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 35Section 80Section 92C

properties of the company including manufacturing facilities, research facilities and office premises. v. A minimum fixed asset cover of 1.1 times over these assets. vi. Net debt / EBIDTA to be not more than 4.5 times vii. Debt gearing not to exceed 1.65 times during the currency of facility. viii. Debt service cover ratio shall not be less than 1.33 times

SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 250/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divya Agrawal & Shri S.V. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 147Section 153CSection 234BSection 44A

House. Therefore, the case of the Revenue is that effectively, the search was not done at a premises of a “third party” but at the corporate office / main office of one of the key partners of the assessee firm itself and on the basis of search at the premises of the key partner of the assessee firm, the incriminating documents

SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 249/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divya Agrawal & Shri S.V. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 147Section 153CSection 234BSection 44A

House. Therefore, the case of the Revenue is that effectively, the search was not done at a premises of a “third party” but at the corporate office / main office of one of the key partners of the assessee firm itself and on the basis of search at the premises of the key partner of the assessee firm, the incriminating documents

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 325/AHD/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divya Agrawal & Shri S.V. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 147Section 153CSection 234BSection 44A

House. Therefore, the case of the Revenue is that effectively, the search was not done at a premises of a “third party” but at the corporate office / main office of one of the key partners of the assessee firm itself and on the basis of search at the premises of the key partner of the assessee firm, the incriminating documents

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 326/AHD/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divya Agrawal & Shri S.V. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 147Section 153CSection 234BSection 44A

House. Therefore, the case of the Revenue is that effectively, the search was not done at a premises of a “third party” but at the corporate office / main office of one of the key partners of the assessee firm itself and on the basis of search at the premises of the key partner of the assessee firm, the incriminating documents

SAI KRUPA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CEN. CIR.1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal 1 to 4 of the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 248/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divya Agrawal & Shri S.V. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 147Section 153CSection 234BSection 44A

House. Therefore, the case of the Revenue is that effectively, the search was not done at a premises of a “third party” but at the corporate office / main office of one of the key partners of the assessee firm itself and on the basis of search at the premises of the key partner of the assessee firm, the incriminating documents