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.

27 results for “house property”+ Section 17clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,300Delhi3,156Bangalore1,144Karnataka763Chennai727Jaipur633Ahmedabad575Hyderabad565Kolkata515Pune357Chandigarh336Surat262Indore259Visakhapatnam207Cochin191Telangana184Amritsar139Rajkot115Raipur106Lucknow90Cuttack81Nagpur78SC74Calcutta63Patna46Jodhpur43Agra39Guwahati38Allahabad27Rajasthan24Dehradun23Varanasi18Ranchi9Orissa9Kerala8A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN4Jabalpur3Punjab & Haryana3Panaji3Gauhati2Andhra Pradesh2J&K1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Himachal Pradesh1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 25035Addition to Income27Section 153A26Section 15422Section 143(3)18Section 6916Section 143(2)14Search & Seizure14House Property

RAJESH KUMAR JAISWAL,,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY/ACIT(CENTRAL), ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 16/ALLD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad02 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the query raised by the assessing authority vide questionnaire issued under section 142 (1) dated 23.01.2021, in assessment proceedings for the AY 2018-19.

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Agarwal & Ms. VidishaFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115Section 115BSection 142Section 24Section 250Section 68Section 69

House property in the case of the wife of the assessee does not in any way affect the treatment of income of this nature as income from business in the hands the assessee, firstly because of our findings on the nature of services that were necessarily to be offered and secondly because in that case

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

13
Section 13212
Section 15311
Exemption4

SUCHITRA TANDON,PRAYAGRAJ vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE - 2 ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 10/ALLD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad14 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 54

section 54 of the Act are not applicable to the facts of the present case. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 54 of the Act amounting to Rs 68,45,580/-. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee

MEJA URJA NIGAM (P) LTD.,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD-2 (2), ALLAHABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for ay: 2015-16 and 2016-17

ITA 54/ALLD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad03 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms.Namita S. Pandey, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Parv Agrawal, CA
Section 143(3)

house property. Likewise, a company may have income from other sources. It may buy shares and get dividends. Such dividends will be taxable under section 56. The company may also, as in this case, keep the surplus fund in short-term deposits in order to earn interest. Such interest will be chargeable under section 56. 13. The company has chosen

SHOBHA RASTOGI,ALLAHABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 47/ALLD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 Aug 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2008-09 Smt. Shobha Rastogi, V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 30-A, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, Tax, Circle-1, Allahabad, U.P. Allahabad, U.P. Pan-Afqpr4774R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. Praveen Godbole, C.A. Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.08.2021

For Appellant: Mr. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

17,99,340/- 2. Because in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was wrong in deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee and since the assessee was not well for last more than 6 months and undergoing dialysis at Lucknow hospital therefore compliance could not be made hence ex-parte

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 87/ALLD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

17. The appellate proceedings had arisen before the learned CIT(A), from separate assessment orders under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 27.12.2016 for the assessment year 2014-15, 14.12.2017 for the assessment year 2015-16 and 26.12.2018 for the assessment year 2016-17, passed by the Assistant / Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Lucknow

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 89/ALLD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

17. The appellate proceedings had arisen before the learned CIT(A), from separate assessment orders under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 27.12.2016 for the assessment year 2014-15, 14.12.2017 for the assessment year 2015-16 and 26.12.2018 for the assessment year 2016-17, passed by the Assistant / Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Lucknow

ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 88/ALLD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

17. The appellate proceedings had arisen before the learned CIT(A), from separate assessment orders under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 27.12.2016 for the assessment year 2014-15, 14.12.2017 for the assessment year 2015-16 and 26.12.2018 for the assessment year 2016-17, passed by the Assistant / Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Lucknow

M/S GANGA NURSING HOME,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT,, ALLAHABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 186/ALLD/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad10 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 50C

property of any kind held by an assessee, whether or not connected with the business or profession of the assessee, but will, inter-alia, not include agricultural land in India, not being a land situated with in any area which is comprised within the jurisdiction of a municipality (whether known as a municipality, municipal corporation, notified area committee, town area

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 149/ALLD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 148/ALLD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 150/ALLD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 353/ALLD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 354/ALLD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 355/ALLD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 356/ALLD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 357/ALLD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 358/ALLD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 145/ALLD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

UMA SHANKER AILANI,ALLAHABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALLAHABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 147/ALLD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad17 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao`

For Appellant: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153Section 153ASection 154Section 250Section 69

17, Industrial Colony Naini, Tax (Appeal)-III, Lucknow Allahabad TAN/PAN:AJEPS5351F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Praveen Godbole, CA Respondent by: Smt. Namita S. Pandey, CIT DR Date of hearing: 16. 12. 2020 Date of pronouncement: 17.12. 2020 O R D E R PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These two set of six appeals by the assessee

SHAKUN DEVI,,ALLAHABAD vs. JT.CIT,, ALLAHABAD

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

ITA 573/ALLD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad05 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri. Ramit Kochara.Y. 2010-11 Shakun Devi, Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Sahson, Allahabad Income Tax, Central Pan-Adapk7419E Circle, Allahabad (Assessee) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.A. Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 31.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.01.2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. Praveen Godbole, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

house property, commercial assets were exempt and even the limit of other assets was raised to 15 lacs (for the asst. yr. 1993-94 to 2009-10) and thereafter, by and large even the assessees, who were furnishing returns prior to 1st April. 1992, in view of the drastic amendment made under the WT Act. chose not to file