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.

92 results for “house property”+ Section 482clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka323Delhi182Mumbai97Bangalore92Ahmedabad79Chandigarh55Kolkata32Jaipur27Chennai23Lucknow16Hyderabad13Indore8Telangana8Varanasi4SC4Surat2Rajkot2Pune2Rajasthan1Agra1Andhra Pradesh1Nagpur1Dehradun1Orissa1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)180Section 201120Section 192120Section 10120Section 271D66Survey u/s 133A61Section 133A60TDS60Section 269S44Addition to Income

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

ITA 939/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nShri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: \nShri Muthu Shankar, CIT &
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 25Section 250Section 8

section 132A. 50.3 Applicability-These\namendments will take effect from the 1st day of June, 2007.\"\n\n6.2 From the perusal of the section 153D of the Act read with the CBDT\nCircular No. 3 of 2008, dated 12-3-2008, the legislative intent can be gathered\nso far as that the legislature in its highest wisdom made it compulsory

Showing 1–20 of 92 · Page 1 of 5

16
Limitation/Time-bar13
Section 273B11

SHRI. GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 482/BANG/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SHRI. GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 481/BANG/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SHRI. GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 489/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SHRI. GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 486/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SHRI. GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 480/BANG/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SHRI. GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 485/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SHRI. GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 484/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SHRI.GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 487/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SHRI. GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 488/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SMT. RAJESHWARI PANDITH,BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 496/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

SHRI. GOPAL S. PANDITH,MYSORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, PANAJI, GOA

ITA 483/BANG/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundar Rajan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

house property did not materialize, assessee refunded said amount through cheque to his wife. On the question whether acceptance of cash by husband from his wife would amount to taking of loan or advance in strict sense of section 269SS , the tribunal held that it cannot be construed as loan attracting provisions of Sec.269SS of the Act and therefore

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 508/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

482 17,472 707 350 8,814 4,224 68,049 2015-16 40,020 14,400 1,460 588 - - 56,468 2016-17 1,30,588 31,320 666 156 9,116 2,275 1,74,121 Shivamogga: Payment to HP In la Sales Cash Medical Benefit u/s Pvt. Ltd. an MDC Projects Total 192 u s 194J

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 507/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

482 17,472 707 350 8,814 4,224 68,049 2015-16 40,020 14,400 1,460 588 - - 56,468 2016-17 1,30,588 31,320 666 156 9,116 2,275 1,74,121 Shivamogga: Payment to HP In la Sales Cash Medical Benefit u/s Pvt. Ltd. an MDC Projects Total 192 u s 194J

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,DAVANGERE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 519/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

482 17,472 707 350 8,814 4,224 68,049 2015-16 40,020 14,400 1,460 588 - - 56,468 2016-17 1,30,588 31,320 666 156 9,116 2,275 1,74,121 Shivamogga: Payment to HP In la Sales Cash Medical Benefit u/s Pvt. Ltd. an MDC Projects Total 192 u s 194J

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 516/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

482 17,472 707 350 8,814 4,224 68,049 2015-16 40,020 14,400 1,460 588 - - 56,468 2016-17 1,30,588 31,320 666 156 9,116 2,275 1,74,121 Shivamogga: Payment to HP In la Sales Cash Medical Benefit u/s Pvt. Ltd. an MDC Projects Total 192 u s 194J

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA ,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 517/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

482 17,472 707 350 8,814 4,224 68,049 2015-16 40,020 14,400 1,460 588 - - 56,468 2016-17 1,30,588 31,320 666 156 9,116 2,275 1,74,121 Shivamogga: Payment to HP In la Sales Cash Medical Benefit u/s Pvt. Ltd. an MDC Projects Total 192 u s 194J

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,DAVANGERE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 522/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

482 17,472 707 350 8,814 4,224 68,049 2015-16 40,020 14,400 1,460 588 - - 56,468 2016-17 1,30,588 31,320 666 156 9,116 2,275 1,74,121 Shivamogga: Payment to HP In la Sales Cash Medical Benefit u/s Pvt. Ltd. an MDC Projects Total 192 u s 194J

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,DAVANGERE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 524/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

482 17,472 707 350 8,814 4,224 68,049 2015-16 40,020 14,400 1,460 588 - - 56,468 2016-17 1,30,588 31,320 666 156 9,116 2,275 1,74,121 Shivamogga: Payment to HP In la Sales Cash Medical Benefit u/s Pvt. Ltd. an MDC Projects Total 192 u s 194J

M/S. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,THIRTHAHALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 on the legal issue and the appeals for assessment years 2015-

ITA 514/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Chytanya KK, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)
Section 10Section 133ASection 192Section 201Section 201(1)

482 17,472 707 350 8,814 4,224 68,049 2015-16 40,020 14,400 1,460 588 - - 56,468 2016-17 1,30,588 31,320 666 156 9,116 2,275 1,74,121 Shivamogga: Payment to HP In la Sales Cash Medical Benefit u/s Pvt. Ltd. an MDC Projects Total 192 u s 194J