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.

1,139 results for “house property”+ Business Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai4,663Delhi3,504Bangalore1,366Chennai1,139Kolkata758Hyderabad552Jaipur549Karnataka473Ahmedabad439Pune347Chandigarh279Indore180Cochin169Telangana167Surat135Rajkot116Raipur106Visakhapatnam98Nagpur93Lucknow88Calcutta69Amritsar68SC64Cuttack63Patna49Agra47Jodhpur40Guwahati33Dehradun23Varanasi23Kerala17Rajasthan16Allahabad15Panaji13Jabalpur10Ranchi7Orissa5Andhra Pradesh2Gauhati2Punjab & Haryana2H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1J&K1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1ANIL R. DAVE L. NAGESWARA RAO1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)86Addition to Income66Section 4048Section 14740Disallowance33Deduction32Section 153C31Section 19528Section 528Exemption

ACIT, CC- 6(2),, CHENNAI vs. S.N. DAMANI INFRA PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3324/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3324/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assistant Commissioner Of Income S.N. Damani Infra Pvt. Ltd., Tax, V. No. 6, Ground Floor, Corporate Circle 6 (2), Rayala Tower, Chennai. 781-785, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. [Pan: Aaocs 0334C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Anand, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2021 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate
Section 24

property and had earned income by letting it out - In its return of income, it had shown such income as business income - However, Assessing Officer assessed said leave income under head 'Income from house

Showing 1–20 of 1,139 · Page 1 of 57

...
22
Section 14821
TDS20

ACIT (OSD) CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(2), CHENNAI vs. KKA BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1159/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1159/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Suresh Periasamy, JCITFor Respondent: Mr. R. Sricharan, C.A
Section 22

property in question is used as business asset and the exclusive business of the assessee company or firm is to earn income by way of rental or lease money, then such rental income can be treated only as the 'Business Income of the Assessee' and not as 'Income from House

KEYARAM HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. No.402/Mds/2013 is dismissed

ITA 1095/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT

property and the balance 25% of the rental income as income from business. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals), for the assessment year 2010-11, 2006-07 and 2009-10, is not correct in holding that the entire rental income is income from house

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. KEYARAM HOTEL PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. No.402/Mds/2013 is dismissed

ITA 402/CHNY/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT

property and the balance 25% of the rental income as income from business. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals), for the assessment year 2010-11, 2006-07 and 2009-10, is not correct in holding that the entire rental income is income from house

KEYARAM DEVELOPERS AND HOTELS P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. No.402/Mds/2013 is dismissed

ITA 2216/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT

property and the balance 25% of the rental income as income from business. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals), for the assessment year 2010-11, 2006-07 and 2009-10, is not correct in holding that the entire rental income is income from house

KEYARAM DEVELOPERS AND HOTELS P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. No.402/Mds/2013 is dismissed

ITA 2215/CHNY/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT

property and the balance 25% of the rental income as income from business. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals), for the assessment year 2010-11, 2006-07 and 2009-10, is not correct in holding that the entire rental income is income from house

DYNACON EQUIPMENTS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA

ITA 2172/CHNY/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

For Appellant: Mr.Srinivasa Rao Vana, JCITFor Respondent: 21.11.2019
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

property or as the business income. Tests which are to be applied for determining the real nature of income are laid down in judicial decisions, on the interpretation of the provisions of these two heads. Wherever there is an income from leasing out of premises and collecting rent, normally such an income is to be treated as income from house

DYNACON EQUIPMENTS PVT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA

ITA 2263/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

For Appellant: Mr.Srinivasa Rao Vana, JCITFor Respondent: 21.11.2019
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

property or as the business income. Tests which are to be applied for determining the real nature of income are laid down in judicial decisions, on the interpretation of the provisions of these two heads. Wherever there is an income from leasing out of premises and collecting rent, normally such an income is to be treated as income from house

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AMPA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2204/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2202, 2203, 2204 & 2205/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ampa Housing Development (P) Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Limited, No. 19, Raman Street, Chennai 600 034. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aacca7430R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. I.P. Roopa Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai Dated 15.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. The Only Common Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue For All The Assessment Years Relates To Apportioning The Intermingled Common Expenditure With Relation To Business Income & Let Out Property Income In The Ratio Of 50:50 Without Valid Basis.

For Appellant: Dr. I.P. Roopa JCITFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, CA

house property income and business income. Thus, while computing the incomes under the head house property and income from business

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AMPA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2202/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2202, 2203, 2204 & 2205/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ampa Housing Development (P) Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Limited, No. 19, Raman Street, Chennai 600 034. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aacca7430R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. I.P. Roopa Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai Dated 15.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. The Only Common Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue For All The Assessment Years Relates To Apportioning The Intermingled Common Expenditure With Relation To Business Income & Let Out Property Income In The Ratio Of 50:50 Without Valid Basis.

For Appellant: Dr. I.P. Roopa JCITFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, CA

house property income and business income. Thus, while computing the incomes under the head house property and income from business

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AMPA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2203/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2202, 2203, 2204 & 2205/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ampa Housing Development (P) Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Limited, No. 19, Raman Street, Chennai 600 034. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aacca7430R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. I.P. Roopa Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai Dated 15.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. The Only Common Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue For All The Assessment Years Relates To Apportioning The Intermingled Common Expenditure With Relation To Business Income & Let Out Property Income In The Ratio Of 50:50 Without Valid Basis.

For Appellant: Dr. I.P. Roopa JCITFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, CA

house property income and business income. Thus, while computing the incomes under the head house property and income from business

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 1 (1),, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AMPA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2205/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2202, 2203, 2204 & 2205/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ampa Housing Development (P) Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Limited, No. 19, Raman Street, Chennai 600 034. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan:Aacca7430R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Dr. I.P. Roopa Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. Ramakrishnan, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Four Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai Dated 15.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. The Only Common Effective Ground Raised By The Revenue For All The Assessment Years Relates To Apportioning The Intermingled Common Expenditure With Relation To Business Income & Let Out Property Income In The Ratio Of 50:50 Without Valid Basis.

For Appellant: Dr. I.P. Roopa JCITFor Respondent: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, CA

house property income and business income. Thus, while computing the incomes under the head house property and income from business

DODLA INTERNATIONAL LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE RANGE-1, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3155/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3155/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Dodla International Ltd., The Acit, 4/54, Rainbow Kasturi Iii Main V. Corporate Range-1 , Road, R.A. Puram, Chennai. Chennai – 600 028. Pan: Aabcd6591R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Suresh Periasamy, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.02.2021

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Periasamy, JCIT

property’ as against the reporting of such income under the head income from business’ in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 3. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the assessment of licence income earned under the head ‘income from house

M/S. CHENNAI BUSINESS TOWER PVT. LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. PCIT-4, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1570/CHNY/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1570/Chny/2025, धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11 M/S. Chennai Business Tower Pcit-4, Private Limited (Formerly Known Vs Chennai. As Rmz Infinity (Chennai) Pvt. . Ltd), 110, Mount Poonamallee Road, Porur, Porur S.O. Kanchipuram – 600 116. [Pan:Aaacd-2287-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, Fca. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Raghupathy, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am:

For Appellant: Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Raghupathy, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 24Section 263

Property' and not under the head 'Business Income', it is relevant to note that the assessee itself had originally offered this income under the head 'Business Income'. The issue as to whether rental income to be taxed under the head 'Income from House

PADMA VASHI SHEWARAMANI,CHENNAI vs. ADIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the impugned is set aside and the appeal of the

ITA 2281/CHNY/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2015AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Vikas Awasthyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2281/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-08 Smt. Padma Vashi Shewaramani, The Assistant Director Of No.73, Janki Bhawan, V. Income Tax, Sardar Patel Road, International Taxation, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aayps 4687 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Mohandass, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. Das Gupta, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 50

property” instead of income from business. It is an admitted fact that in the earlier assessment years, the assessee has been admitting the rental income under the head “income from business”. For the assessment year under appeal the assessee changed the head from the business income to “income from house

K.THANIKACHALAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2629/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2628 & 2629/Mds/2014 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09&2010-11 Shri K. Thanikachalam, The Asstt. Commissioner Of C/O. S. Sridhar, V. Income Tax, Advocate, Business Circle - Ii, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Chennai. 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. [Pan: Aaept 1404 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.01.2017 घोषणाक"तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2017 आदेश आदेश /O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per D.S. Sunder Singh:

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

business income, but not as property income. The Assessing Officer relied on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. [2004] 135 Taxman 509 (Mad.) and taxed the income as income from house

K.THANIKACHALAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2628/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.2628 & 2629/Mds/2014 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09&2010-11 Shri K. Thanikachalam, The Asstt. Commissioner Of C/O. S. Sridhar, V. Income Tax, Advocate, Business Circle - Ii, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Chennai. 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. [Pan: Aaept 1404 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Jcit सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.01.2017 घोषणाक"तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.02.2017 आदेश आदेश /O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per D.S. Sunder Singh:

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

business income, but not as property income. The Assessing Officer relied on the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. [2004] 135 Taxman 509 (Mad.) and taxed the income as income from house

VIMALARANI BRITTO,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as

ITA 2992/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2992/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Smt. Vimalarani Britto Vs Assistant Commissioner Of 13, Kasturba Nagar, Income Tax, 3Rd Main Road, Adyar, Central Circle-2(4) Chennai-600 020. Chennai. Pan: Aadpv 8816C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 71Section 71(2)

business or profession in the order of preference, as provided under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Admittedly, income tax provides for computation of income in order of preference starting from 7 income under the head salary, income from house property

M/S. SABARI ENTERPRISES,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2173/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.N.Madhavan,, ACIT, D.RFor Respondent: 15.11.2017

properties is in fact is the business of the assessee. The assessee, therefore, rightly disclosed the income under the head "Income from business". It cannot be treated as "Income from the house

A R HOLDINGS AND ELECTRONICS P LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD - 11(4), CHENNAI

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

ITA 57/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr. R.Clement Ramesh-

property” and the amenity charges had been offered under the head “income from business”. It was a submission that the AO had treated the income received by the assessee from amenity charges which had been offered under the head “income from business” as liable to be ITA Nos.57 & 58/Chny/2018 :- 4 -: assessed under the head “income from house