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.

6 results for “house property”+ Section 80P(2)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai90Bangalore43Delhi33Kolkata15Jaipur15Chennai11Indore8Pune8Chandigarh7Ahmedabad6Surat6Cochin5Telangana5Kerala3Varanasi3SC2Rajkot2Hyderabad2Nagpur2Karnataka2Visakhapatnam1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(a)18Section 577Section 80P(2)(d)6Deduction6Addition to Income6Section 563Section 143(2)2Section 80P2Disallowance2

SHRI VAJAPUR PATIDAR CO. OPARATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-5, PATAN

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 27/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddharatha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 27/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2017-2018 Shri Vajapur Patidar Co. Operative Credit I.T.O., Society Limited, Vs. Ward-5, At. Vijapaur Po. Sanghpur, Patan. Ta. Vijapaur, Dist. Mehsana

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Agarwal, Sr.D.R
Section 80P(2)(d)

d) of the Act, 1961. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 10.2 Coming to next issue with regard to basic deduction as provided under section 80P(2)(c) of the Act and prayed by the assessee in the ground of appeal before us. The provisions of section 80P(2)(c) of the Act, provides that

BARODA CITIZEN COMMUNITY CO. OP. CREDIT SCOIETY LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 1051/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 996 & 1051/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Baroda Citizen Community Co-Op. Credit I.T.O, Society Ltd., Vs. Ward-1(2)(2), 203, 2Nd Floor, Baroda. Ivory Terrace, R.C. Dutt Road, Vadodara.

For Appellant: Shri NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned two appeals have been filed at the instance of the Assessee for the different assessment years against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Vadodara, arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here

BARODA CITIZEN COMMUNITY CO. OP. CREDIT SCOIETY LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 996/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 996 & 1051/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Baroda Citizen Community Co-Op. Credit I.T.O, Society Ltd., Vs. Ward-1(2)(2), 203, 2Nd Floor, Baroda. Ivory Terrace, R.C. Dutt Road, Vadodara.

For Appellant: Shri NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 56Section 80P(2)(a)

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned two appeals have been filed at the instance of the Assessee for the different assessment years against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Vadodara, arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here

JAVED ABDULSAMED KURESHI,,BANASKANTHA vs. ITO, WARD-2, , PALANPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2549/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 224/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Dholasan Dudh Utpadak Sahkari Mandli I.T.O., Ltd., Vs. Ward-1, At & Po Dholasan, Mehsana. Tal. & Dist., Mehsana-382732. Pan: Bpkpp9036F

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Salvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 80P

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Gandhinagar, dated 11/12/2018 arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred

DHOLASAN DUDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,MEHSANA vs. ITO, WARD-1, MEHSANA

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 224/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 224/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Dholasan Dudh Utpadak Sahkari Mandli I.T.O., Ltd., Vs. Ward-1, At & Po Dholasan, Mehsana. Tal. & Dist., Mehsana-382732. Pan: Bpkpp9036F

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Salvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr.D.R
Section 80P

D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Gandhinagar, dated 11/12/2018 arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred

NAUTILUS PREMISE OWNERS ASSOCIATION,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 2146/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Manish J Shah & Shri Rushin Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 56Section 57

D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Noida vide order dated 04.10.2024 passed for A.Y. 2017- 18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On facts