Search: house property | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

54 results for “house property”+ Section 69Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi344 Mumbai244 Jaipur181 Bangalore117 Chandigarh85 Cochin75 Chennai72 Hyderabad71 Ahmedabad63 Pune60 Amritsar54 Indore44 Agra32 Surat29 Lucknow23 Raipur19 Visakhapatnam18 Rajkot16 Jodhpur15 Nagpur12 Kolkata11 Patna10 Cuttack7 Guwahati5 Allahabad4 Varanasi4 SC3 Dehradun3 Telangana1 Karnataka1 Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 69A52 Addition to Income51 Section 153A48 Section 25028 Section 26326 Undisclosed Income22 Section 143(3)19 Section 6917 Section 6815 Section 148

M/S ACTIVE TOOLS (P). LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -II, JALANDHAR

ITA 260/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 115Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 154Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69CSection 69D

sections 69, 69A, 69 and 69C being treated separately, because such deemed income is not income from salary, house property

Showing 1–20 of 54 · Page 1 of 3

14

Search & Seizure8

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: HeardITAT Amritsar06 Oct 2023AY 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

sections 69, 69A and 69C being treated separately, because such deemed income is not income from salary, house property, profits

SHRIMATI RAVINDER BAWA,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(3), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 703/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meena

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 69A

properties Private Ltd. Vs. CIT 109 ITR 229 are also relevant. “Where assessment order is in accordance with law, it cannot be termed to be erroneous, C.I.T Vs. Ashoka Traders SLP Civil no. 2374-2375 of 1995 dismissed by the Supreme Court 212 ITR (ST) 369.” 23. It was submitted that the observations of Principal Commissioner of Income

DASHMESH TIMBER AND FURNITURE HOUSE,AJNALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

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

ITA 542/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 115BSection 133ASection 133A(3)(iii)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

section 69 of the Act 1961. 11 I.T.A. No. 542/Asr/2024 Dashmesh Timber and Furniture House v. Dy. CIT 12. The AR further relying on the jurisdictional High court judgment in the case of Sudarshan Gupta, (2008) 10 DTR (P&H) 184, submitted that when an offer of surrender is being accepted by the department, the same should be accepted

SHRI MOHD MANZOOR,RAJOURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2 (3), JAMMU

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

ITA 166/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar21 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 144Section 250oSection 28Section 44ASection 69A

house with his wife till her death— ITO questioning its source after the same had subsequently been deposited with a bank in the names of assessee's then major daughters—In the absence of any evidence to the effect that the said sum was utilized by the assessee in any other manner, the Department was not justified in unreasonably rejecting

SHRI HIRA LAL KADLABJU,GHAZIABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 28/ASR/2023[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 May 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.28/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2001-02

Section 143(3)Section 250oSection 69A

section 69A has not been met and hence deserves to be quashed. 4. The addition of Rs. 5,50,000 has been made without judicious appreciation of facts and records I.T.A. No.28/Asr/2023 4 I.T.A. No.193/Asr/2014 available with the Ld. AO and is based only on one factor that the appellant could not produce the person who had advanced the money

SH. ANISH BHAN,JAMMU vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 193/ASR/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 May 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.28/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2001-02

Section 143(3)Section 250oSection 69A

section 69A has not been met and hence deserves to be quashed. 4. The addition of Rs. 5,50,000 has been made without judicious appreciation of facts and records I.T.A. No.28/Asr/2023 4 I.T.A. No.193/Asr/2014 available with the Ld. AO and is based only on one factor that the appellant could not produce the person who had advanced the money

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

ITA 346/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C. A

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 68

house property at Rs.75,600/-, short term capital loss at (Rs.30,618/-), income from bank interest at Rs.17,667/- and LTCG (long term capital gains) amounting to Rs.2,02, 30,196/- which has been claimed as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act) . After a search operation u/s 132 of the Act 1961 carried out on 29th

SMT. SATYAWATI MARWAHA THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH, CHANDER SHEIKHAR MARWAHA,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal for Asstt

ITA 347/ASR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C. A

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 144Section 144rSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 68

house property at Rs.75,600/-, short term capital loss at (Rs.30,618/-), income from bank interest at Rs.17,667/- and LTCG (long term capital gains) amounting to Rs.2,02, 30,196/- which has been claimed as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act) . After a search operation u/s 132 of the Act 1961 carried out on 29th

M/S HORIZON BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS,AMRITSAR. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the assessee's appeals are partly allowed

ITA 400/ASR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryi.T.A Nos.399&400(Asr)/2015 Assessment Years: 2007-08&2009-10 Pan: Aaefh 5966J

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia (C.A)For Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur (D.R)

Section 153CSection 69Section 69A

property dealing, is a related concern in-as-much as its’ two partners are fathers of two of the three partners of the assessee-firm. The returned income being nil, assessment was framed at Rs. 11 lacs, being Rs. 10 lacs added u/s. 69/69A on account of unexplained expenditure, and Rs. 1 lac estimated as income on contract work

M/S HORIZON BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS,AMRITSAR. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the assessee's appeals are partly allowed

ITA 399/ASR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryi.T.A Nos.399&400(Asr)/2015 Assessment Years: 2007-08&2009-10 Pan: Aaefh 5966J

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia (C.A)For Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur (D.R)

Section 153CSection 69Section 69A

property dealing, is a related concern in-as-much as its’ two partners are fathers of two of the three partners of the assessee-firm. The returned income being nil, assessment was framed at Rs. 11 lacs, being Rs. 10 lacs added u/s. 69/69A on account of unexplained expenditure, and Rs. 1 lac estimated as income on contract work

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

69A. Whereas the ld. CIT(A) has directed for violation of section 269SS and 269T for accepting and repaying the loan in cash exceeding the prescribed limit against Mr Prem Pal Singh. Both the provisions cannot run together. We find that there is no merit in the order of the revenue. There, no statement was recorded from Sh. Prem

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

69A. Whereas the ld. CIT(A) has directed for violation of section 269SS and 269T for accepting and repaying the loan in cash exceeding the prescribed limit against Mr Prem Pal Singh. Both the provisions cannot run together. We find that there is no merit in the order of the revenue. There, no statement was recorded from Sh. Prem

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

69A. Whereas the ld. CIT(A) has directed for violation of section 269SS and 269T for accepting and repaying the loan in cash exceeding the prescribed limit against Mr Prem Pal Singh. Both the provisions cannot run together. We find that there is no merit in the order of the revenue. There, no statement was recorded from Sh. Prem

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

69A. Whereas the ld. CIT(A) has directed for violation of section 269SS and 269T for accepting and repaying the loan in cash exceeding the prescribed limit against Mr Prem Pal Singh. Both the provisions cannot run together. We find that there is no merit in the order of the revenue. There, no statement was recorded from Sh. Prem

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

69A. Whereas the ld. CIT(A) has directed for violation of section 269SS and 269T for accepting and repaying the loan in cash exceeding the prescribed limit against Mr Prem Pal Singh. Both the provisions cannot run together. We find that there is no merit in the order of the revenue. There, no statement was recorded from Sh. Prem

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

69A. Whereas the ld. CIT(A) has directed for violation of section 269SS and 269T for accepting and repaying the loan in cash exceeding the prescribed limit against Mr Prem Pal Singh. Both the provisions cannot run together. We find that there is no merit in the order of the revenue. There, no statement was recorded from Sh. Prem

SHRI MANMOHAN SINGH KAPUR,HOSHIARPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 68/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

house property. (v) The assessee deposited cash of Rs 20,00,000/- during demonetization period and was thus obliged to explain the nature and source of cash credits of Rs 20,00,000/-. Income of Rs. 17,50,000/- only was declared under the head Misc. income. Rs 2.5 lac is not a standard deduction. As per the above mentioned

SMT HARNEET KAUR JUNEJA,JALANDHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 66/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

house property. (v) The assessee deposited cash of Rs 20,00,000/- during demonetization period and was thus obliged to explain the nature and source of cash credits of Rs 20,00,000/-. Income of Rs. 17,50,000/- only was declared under the head Misc. income. Rs 2.5 lac is not a standard deduction. As per the above mentioned

SHRI SUKHJIT SINGH,HOSHIARPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 67/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Balwinder Kaur, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

house property. (v) The assessee deposited cash of Rs 20,00,000/- during demonetization period and was thus obliged to explain the nature and source of cash credits of Rs 20,00,000/-. Income of Rs. 17,50,000/- only was declared under the head Misc. income. Rs 2.5 lac is not a standard deduction. As per the above mentioned