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.

287 results for “house property”+ Section 73(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,428Mumbai1,308Karnataka548Bangalore479Ahmedabad287Chennai282Jaipur270Hyderabad249Kolkata221Surat170Chandigarh152Indore114Cochin113Telangana72Pune66Calcutta57Raipur55Rajkot45Nagpur43Visakhapatnam42Lucknow38Guwahati23Cuttack22SC19Agra10Amritsar9Patna9Rajasthan8Jodhpur8Varanasi7Dehradun6Orissa4Allahabad3Ranchi3Andhra Pradesh1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Addition to Income62Section 143(3)60Section 14A57Disallowance53Section 14831Deduction26Depreciation24Section 115J22Section 13221

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1499/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Showing 1–20 of 287 · Page 1 of 15

...
Transfer Pricing18
Section 92C16
Section 43B16

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2706/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE JT.CIT.,(OSD)CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1385/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2917/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 441/AHD/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2765/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 442/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1281/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2489/AHD/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2201/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADDL.CIT., RANGE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3254/AHD/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT., CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 118/AHD/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 722/AHD/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3126/AHD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2202/AHD/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1966/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2334/AHD/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDERS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-3(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2916/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. RAJKAMAL BUILDER INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD,, AHMEDABAD

In the result this ground of appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri (Dr.) Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT-DR and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80I

property. The Contractor will be liable for any damage done in or outside work area. This stipulation contained in Clause-23 Page No.55 of the TD. ITA.No.441/Ahd/2011 and 20 Others Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure P.Ltd. 20 24. The contractor is to provide, erect and maintain barricade including signs and comma, markings, flats, lights and flagment as specified under Clause

SHRI KIRANKUMAR RASIKLAL SANGHVI,DEESA vs. THE PR.CIT-4,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 179/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Kirankumar Rasiklal Sanghvi, The Principal Commissioner Of 1, Paras Society, Neminathnagar Income-Tax-4, Vs. Road, Deesa, Gujarat-385535 Ahmedabad Pan : Afops 0131 D अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Manish J. Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, Ars Revenue By : Shri Durga Dutt, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.09.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24.09.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax-4, Ahmedabad [Herein- After Referred To As “Pcit”] Dated 03.03.2020, In Exercise Of His Revisionary Powers Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. The Registry Has Noted The Present Appeal To Be Barred By Limitation By 1355 Days. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Explained That There Was, In Fact, No Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal For The Reason That The Assessee Had Inadvertently Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Pcit Before The Surat Bench Of The Itat Which, When The Appeal Came Up For Hearing Before It, Passed A Judicial Order Dated 21.11.2023 Dismissing The Appeal As Withdrawn, Noting The Fact That The Correct Jurisdiction Lay With The 2 Shri Kirankumar Rasiklal Sanghvi Vs. Pcit Ay : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Durga Dutt, CIT-DR
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 23Section 263Section 54F

properties to qualify as residential house in terms of section 54F of the Act. We shall elaborate the same hereunder. 4 Shri Kirankumar Rasiklal Sanghvi Vs. PCIT AY : 2015-16 5. The assessee had claimed exemption u/s 54F of the Act to the tune of Rs.3,86,86,482/- from capital gains earned of Rs.5,73