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.

57 results for “house property”+ Section 34clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,210Mumbai2,129Bangalore814Karnataka674Chennai468Jaipur339Kolkata322Hyderabad291Ahmedabad263Surat221Chandigarh171Indore151Telangana123Pune122Cochin118Raipur78Nagpur62Calcutta57Amritsar56Lucknow54SC47Agra45Rajkot45Visakhapatnam36Cuttack34Patna29Jodhpur26Guwahati26Varanasi19Rajasthan15Allahabad12Kerala8Orissa7Panaji5Jabalpur5Dehradun5Andhra Pradesh2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2J&K1Punjab & Haryana1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1Gauhati1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 1385Section 343Section 36(1)3Section 36(2)2

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 KOLKATA vs. PREMIER TIE UP PVT LTD

ITAT/81/2022HC Calcutta26 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

For Respondent: Mr. Dhruba Ghosh, Adv
Section 34Section 36(1)Section 36(2)

Section 12 read with the Seventh Schedule and the impugned award is thus liable to be set aside on this ground alone.” 90. Mr. Dhruba Ghosh relied upon a recent decision of the Single Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of Sheetal Maruti Kurundwade v. Metal Power Analytical (I) Pvt. Ltd. And Others reported

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3, KOLKATA vs. M/S. ITC LIMITED

Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated

ITA/125/2018HC Calcutta

Showing 1–20 of 57 · Page 1 of 3

27 Jun 2024

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI,HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

34-42 VI. Submissions 43-50 VII. Discussions and Findings 50-77 Page 2 of 77 A.F.R JUDGMENT Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J.: 1. Heard Sri Om Narayan Rai, learned senior standing counsel assisted by Sri Prithu Dudheria, learned junior standing counsel for the appellant and Sri J.P. Khaitan, learned senior advocate assisted by Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, learned advocate

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S. CENTURY ENKA LIMITED

ITA/7/2020HC Calcutta27 Feb 2023

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S V2 RETAIL LTD.

ITAT/18/2020HC Calcutta28 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. JAGANNATH BANWARILAL TEXOFABS PVT LTD

ITAT/9/2020HC Calcutta27 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. J.J.EXPORTERS LTD.

ITAT/5/2020HC Calcutta26 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. L D S CITY PROJECTS PVT LTD

ITAT/3/2020HC Calcutta21 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-1), KOLKATA vs. M/S. RUNGTA MINES LTD

ITA/13/2020HC Calcutta08 Apr 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KOLKATA vs. M/S. TCG LIFESCIENCES LTD.

ITAT/10/2020HC Calcutta08 Apr 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S THE CALCUTTA TRAMWAYS COMPANY (1978) LTD.

ITAT/20/2020HC Calcutta04 Mar 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA vs. M/S. HEIGHT INSURANCE SERVICES LTD

ITAT/4/2020HC Calcutta16 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL CIT-14, KOLKATA vs. SHRI VISHWANATH GUPTA

ITA/21/2020HC Calcutta07 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

RAJESH JAJODIA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 45 KOLKATA AND ORS

ITAT/26/2020HC Calcutta27 Aug 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

M/S SINGHI AND CO vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VIII

ITA/15/2020HC Calcutta27 Apr 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

TCG LIFE SCIENCES PVT LTD vs. JOINT COMM OF INCOME TAX RANGE59 KOL AND ANR

ITA/26/2020HC Calcutta04 Mar 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S KESORAM INDUSTRIES LTD.

ITAT/17/2020HC Calcutta13 Jan 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING),HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

SHWETA CHHAWCHHARIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-12

ITAT/15/2020HC Calcutta21 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-2, KOLKATA vs. ELECTROCAST SALES INDIA LTD.

ITAT/11/2020HC Calcutta18 Dec 2020

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA

34 of the Letters Patent confers testamentary jurisdiction on the High Court, a probate court exercises special and limited jurisdiction as it is not an ordinary Civil Court, nor a company court. In the impugned order passed by the learned single bench dated 18.09.2020, this principle of law has been accepted. It is submitted that a probate petition for letters

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-15, KOLKATA vs. SMT. BABITA AGARWAL

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/64/2020HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 263 could not have been exercised and such power could have been exercised only when the assessing officer failed to conduct an enquiry which is not the case of the assessee before this Court. With regard to under what circumstances the power under Section 263 could be invoked and the parameters to be fulfilled, reliance was placed

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MUKESH SARAOGI (HUF)

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/76/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 263 could not have been exercised and such power could have been exercised only when the assessing officer failed to conduct an enquiry which is not the case of the assessee before this Court. With regard to under what circumstances the power under Section 263 could be invoked and the parameters to be fulfilled, reliance was placed