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.

34 results for “house property”+ Section 56(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,016Delhi996Bangalore375Jaipur232Hyderabad202Chandigarh156Chennai135Ahmedabad125Kolkata107Cochin94Pune85Indore59Raipur56SC41Nagpur37Lucknow35Amritsar34Visakhapatnam27Rajkot24Surat23Guwahati22Agra19Jodhpur17Cuttack10Patna10Varanasi6Dehradun3Ranchi2Jabalpur2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Allahabad1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 153A48Addition to Income34Section 69A30Section 25029Undisclosed Income22Section 13211Section 698Search & Seizure7Section 686

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -3,, SRINAGAR vs. M/S JYOTI LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 612/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250

2. The Ld. CIT(A) is in error in placing reliance upon cases that are distinguishable on facts in as much as the assessee has only leased property to sister concern and the transaction is not in the business of leasing. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by admitting additional grounds during

M/S SHANKAR RICE & GENERAL MILLS ,MOGA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, MOGA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 205/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: Heard

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

Section 1396
Section 250(6)5
Unexplained Money3
ITAT Amritsar
06 Oct 2023
AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Muskan GargFor Respondent: Sh. Rajiv Wadhera, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

2(45)/4/5 of the IT. Act yet that does not mean that income assessable under section 68 has to be assessed under section 56. In the case before us, source of unexplained cash credits is not known and hence they cannot be linked to any known source/head of income including income from other sources. In order to constitute 'income

SHRI ADARSH KUMAR NAGPAL,ABOHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (3), ABOHAR

The appeal of the assessee is disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 147/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69Section 69A

section 69 of the Act against the payment of Motor Vehicle Tax on behalf of the business concern. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in making the addition relating to the rent received in cash. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in making addition of Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of personal savings. 5. That

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI JATINDER SINGH BEDI , JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

ITA 90/ASR/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

house for which the surrender has been made and the minor expenses are related to the college. The AO observed that however, it is clearly mentioned in the updated account on page no. 170 that only a sum of Rs. 81,301/- of Bill no. 3 is for residence. Hence the remaining amount of Rs. 38,07,065/- was held

SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

ITA 51/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

house for which the surrender has been made and the minor expenses are related to the college. The AO observed that however, it is clearly mentioned in the updated account on page no. 170 that only a sum of Rs. 81,301/- of Bill no. 3 is for residence. Hence the remaining amount of Rs. 38,07,065/- was held

SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

ITA 53/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

house for which the surrender has been made and the minor expenses are related to the college. The AO observed that however, it is clearly mentioned in the updated account on page no. 170 that only a sum of Rs. 81,301/- of Bill no. 3 is for residence. Hence the remaining amount of Rs. 38,07,065/- was held

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

ITA 87/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

house for which the surrender has been made and the minor expenses are related to the college. The AO observed that however, it is clearly mentioned in the updated account on page no. 170 that only a sum of Rs. 81,301/- of Bill no. 3 is for residence. Hence the remaining amount of Rs. 38,07,065/- was held

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

ITA 88/ASR/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

house for which the surrender has been made and the minor expenses are related to the college. The AO observed that however, it is clearly mentioned in the updated account on page no. 170 that only a sum of Rs. 81,301/- of Bill no. 3 is for residence. Hence the remaining amount of Rs. 38,07,065/- was held

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI JATINDER SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

ITA 89/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

house for which the surrender has been made and the minor expenses are related to the college. The AO observed that however, it is clearly mentioned in the updated account on page no. 170 that only a sum of Rs. 81,301/- of Bill no. 3 is for residence. Hence the remaining amount of Rs. 38,07,065/- was held

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE), JAMMU vs. ANITA KAPAHI, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

ITA 557/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69

property for the purpose of section 53A of 1882 Act is registered, it shall not have effect for purposes of section 53A of the 1882 Act. (Para 21]" The jurisdictional High Court of Punjab & Haryana has clearly upheld the view that the registered document shall carry the legal backing rather than an unregistered photocopy of the document. Further

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. RAJNI MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 249/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. RAJNI MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 251/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUR MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 340/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUR MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 382/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXQ, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUSH MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 384/ASR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUSH MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 385/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUSH MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 386/ASR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUSH MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 387/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUSH MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 388/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. ANKUR MARWAHA, JALANDHAR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 390/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. K. Mehboob Ali Khan, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

56,000/-made on basis of incriminating material on account of production of cigarette in the absence of plausible explanation by the assessee, without going into the merit of the case? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2