Search: house property

265 results for “house property”+ Section 10(22)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Addition to Income56 Section 143(3)48 Section 14846 Section 26343 Section 153A35 Section 143(2)33 Section 69A30 Section 12722 Section 43C

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, SECTOR 17

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 339/CHANDI/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019

For Appellant: \nSh. Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR

Section 263

property, to contract, and to sue or be sued in its own name, to\nexercise powers conferred on, and perform the functions assigned to it\nunder this Act.\n1. 3. Further, Section 24 of the Act (Relevant extract of Section 24 is\nmentioned at page 13 of the BOCW Act, 1996) lays down that the Board\nshall have the responsibility

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 337/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 265 · Page 1 of 14

...

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, SECTOR 17

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, SECTOR 17

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

HARYANA BUILDING AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

ITO, W-4, PANCHKULA vs. SMT. SEEMA BISHNOI, PANCHKULA

M/S PAGRO FROZEN FOODS PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

M/S FATEH HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO WARD-1(4), CHANDIGARH

M/S CHANDIGARH LAWN TENNIS ASSOCIATION,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATORIES AND EDUCATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATORIES AND EDUCATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATORIES AND EDUCATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

SCOTT EDIL ADVANCE RESEARCH LABORATORIES AND EDUCATION LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

SCOTT EDIL PHARMACIA LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

SANJEEV AGGARWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

SANJEEV AGGARWAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , CHANDIGARH

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

SHRI BALRAM KRISHAN,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

MAXPORT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH