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.

250 results for “house property”+ Section 73(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai768Delhi745Bangalore250Hyderabad187Jaipur178Chandigarh121Ahmedabad115Chennai83Cochin73Indore63Kolkata62Raipur49Nagpur37Rajkot36Pune36Surat31Lucknow25Guwahati22SC20Visakhapatnam10Cuttack10Patna9Agra5Amritsar4Dehradun4Jodhpur3Ranchi1Jabalpur1Allahabad1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Addition to Income71Section 153C57Section 153A46Section 13245Section 143(3)36Section 1126Section 2(15)25Transfer Pricing25Disallowance

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. SRI C GANGADHARA MURTHY , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2400/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Shri C. Gangadhara Murthy Income-Tax, No. 322, 3Rd A Corss, 2Nd Block Circle - 6(2)(1) 3Rd Stage, Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore . Bangalore 560079. Pan – Agipg 2668 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2

1) was issued to the assessee giving last opportunity for substantiating his case, but the assessee did not appear. Accordingly the AO completed the assessment under Section 144 of the Act after considering the documents/material available before him and computed the gross total income at Rs.3,73,98,834/- as under: - Income from House property

Showing 1–20 of 250 · Page 1 of 13

...
25
Deduction25
Section 25022
Section 143(2)20

KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. DCIT-(EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1265/BANG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Nov 2024AY 2011-12
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80G(5)(vi)

houses,\nprinting presses, hostels, residential quarters and the like.\n(ii) To provide medical relief to the poor, distressed, afflicted and mentally,\nphysically, or psychologically handicapped persons, in India including supply of\nspectacles and other medical, surgical and remedial appliances and for this\npurpose to start, establish, conduct, maintain and manage and help\ndispensaries, hospitals, medical centres, diagnostic centres

YASH VARDHAN ARYA,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) WARD-1(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 203/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

house property as provided in section 23(1)(c) of the Act. We, therefore, set aside the order of the learned CIT(A) and the grounds of appeal Nos.5, 6 & 7 raised by the assessee are allowed.” In the present case, the facts involved are similar to that of Smt. Indu Chandra (supra). So, respectfully following the order

KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. DCIT-(EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1266/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Nov 2024AY 2012-13
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80G(5)(vi)

houses,\nprinting presses, hostels, residential quarters and the like.\n(ii) To provide medical relief to the poor, distressed, afflicted and mentally,\nphysically, or psychologically handicapped persons, in India including supply of\nspectacles and other medical, surgical and remedial appliances and for this\npurpose to start, establish, conduct, maintain and manage and help\ndispensaries, hospitals, medical centres, diagnostic centres

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

73,474/- as against the returned income of Rs.6,95,140/-.\n\n6. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned\nCIT(A), raising various grounds of appeal challenging the validity of the\nsearch and consequence assessment order as well challenging the\naddition or disallowances made on the merits. However, the learned\nCIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeals

SREENIVASULU SAGALETI,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2493/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year :2018-19

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 54FSection 54F(1)Section 54F(4)

property", other than the new asset, the amount of capital gain arising from the transfer of the original asset not charged under section 45 on the basis of the cost of such new asset as provided in clause (a), or, as the case may be, clause (b), of sub-section (1), shall be deemed to Page

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

ITA 940/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT &
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 25Section 250Section 8

73,474/- as against the returned income of Rs.6,95,140/-.\n6. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned\nCIT(A), raising various grounds of appeal challenging the validity of the\nsearch and consequence assessment order as well challenging the\naddition or disallowances made on the merits. However, the learned\nCIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeals

M/S. RMZ HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 954/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 234Section 255Section 255(3)Section 36

house property, it can also set up another line of business, it may even pay dividends out of this income to its shareholders. There is no overriding title of anybody diverting the income at source to pay the amount to the creditors of the company. It is well- settled that tax is attracted at the point when the income

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 109/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

73,547 3.7 The assessee being aggrieved by the assessment orders filed appear before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)) 3.8 The CIT(A) without appreciating the submissions of the assessee dismissed all the appeals vide different orders dated 07.01.2022. 3.9 The assessee being aggrieved by the orders

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 107/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

73,547 3.7 The assessee being aggrieved by the assessment orders filed appear before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)) 3.8 The CIT(A) without appreciating the submissions of the assessee dismissed all the appeals vide different orders dated 07.01.2022. 3.9 The assessee being aggrieved by the orders

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 108/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

73,547 3.7 The assessee being aggrieved by the assessment orders filed appear before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)) 3.8 The CIT(A) without appreciating the submissions of the assessee dismissed all the appeals vide different orders dated 07.01.2022. 3.9 The assessee being aggrieved by the orders

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

ITA 46/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2008-09
Section 153ASection 153C

Housing Ltd Vs. ITO, 45 taxmann.com 144 (Kar). The\nlearned Standing Council for the Revenue submitted that in this case\nthe Jurisdictional Karnataka High Court held that the provisions of\nsection 158BD does not preclude the AO from initiating action under\nsection 147 to bring to tax material found in a search.\nThe learned AR contented that this case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

In the result, we allow appeal filed by the assessee

ITA 48/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2010-11
Section 153ASection 153C

Housing Ltd Vs. ITO, 45 taxmann.com 144 (Kar). The\nlearned Standing Council for the Revenue submitted that in this case\nthe Jurisdictional Karnataka High Court held that the provisions of\nsection 158BD does not preclude the AO from initiating action under\nsection 147 to bring to tax material found in a search.\nThe learned AR contented that this case

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2136/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

house (except with the consent of the occupier thereof) without previously giving such occupier at least seven days' notice in writing of his intention to do so. (ii) The holder of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to pay compensation in such manner as may be prescribed

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2139/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

house (except with the consent of the occupier thereof) without previously giving such occupier at least seven days' notice in writing of his intention to do so. (ii) The holder of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to pay compensation in such manner as may be prescribed

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2138/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

house (except with the consent of the occupier thereof) without previously giving such occupier at least seven days' notice in writing of his intention to do so. (ii) The holder of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to pay compensation in such manner as may be prescribed

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2137/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

house (except with the consent of the occupier thereof) without previously giving such occupier at least seven days' notice in writing of his intention to do so. (ii) The holder of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to pay compensation in such manner as may be prescribed

M/S KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2135/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar &
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35ESection 37

house (except with the consent of the occupier thereof) without previously giving such occupier at least seven days' notice in writing of his intention to do so. (ii) The holder of a reconnaissance permit, prospecting licence or mining lease referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to pay compensation in such manner as may be prescribed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE vs. MR. D K SHIVAKUMAR, BANGALORE

ITA 45/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2025AY 2007-08
Section 153ASection 153C

Housing Ltd Vs. ITO, 45 taxmann.com 144 (Kar). The\nlearned Standing Council for the Revenue submitted that in this case\nthe Jurisdictional Karnataka High Court held that the provisions of\nsection 158BD does not preclude the AO from initiating action under\nsection 147 to bring to tax material found in a search.\nThe learned AR contented that this case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE vs. M/S. CHAITANYA PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 494/BANG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri. V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 1Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153C

Section u/s.153C u/s.139 per 143(3) 143(1) 143(3) (In Income/ (In Rs.) (In Rs.) r.w.s 153C Deductions Rs.) Iln Rs.) 39,99,76,522/- 39,99,76,522/- 39,99,76,522/ Income 39,99,76,522/ from Business Income from 9,43,00,296/- 9,43,00,296/- 73,63,76,690 399976522 94300296 house property