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.

41 results for “house property”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai190Delhi172Bangalore73Chennai41Jaipur40Kolkata33Karnataka23Chandigarh22Ahmedabad22Lucknow22Hyderabad15Visakhapatnam13Pune11Indore10Surat10Nagpur8Agra5Panaji5Patna5Rajkot5Cochin4Jodhpur4Cuttack4Raipur4Telangana3Guwahati2Amritsar2Allahabad2SC1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)32Section 15427Section 14724Section 56(2)(x)24Addition to Income19Rectification u/s 15419Section 26317Section 13214Section 143(1)14Natural Justice

M/S. RMZ INFINITY (CHENNAI) PVT. LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. PCIT-4, , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 511/CHNY/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.511/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2009-10 M/S.Rmz Infinity(Chennai) Pvt. Ltd, The Principal Commissioner Of No.110, Mount Poonamallee Road, Income Tax-4, Porur, Porur S.O, Circle-1, Ltu, Kanchipuram Dist, Chennai Tamil Nadu-600 116. [Pan: Aaacd2287R]

For Appellant: Shri B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 263

rectification u/s 154 towards following issues:- i) That in the order u/s.143(1) capital gains has been calculated while omitting to consider cost of acquisition of Rs.2,55,70,923/-. ii) TDS claim of Rs.3,29,478/- has not been considered qua M/s.Hewlatt Packard Global Soft Pvt Ltd iii) The assessee is primarily earning lease rental income under the head

Showing 1–20 of 41 · Page 1 of 3

13
Section 153A12
Exemption10

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

House Property' or under the head 'Business Income', it is required of the AO to carefully examine the constitution documents of the assessee, lease agreements etc. which can be done only under regular scrutiny examination. However, the AO has passed rectification order without any such examination and in any case such examination cannot be undertaken in proceedings u/s 154

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2574/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

u/s. 234A & 234B has to be re-considered as per the Act. From the above it is clear that there has been mistake apparent on record which need to be rectified in accordance to the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. I further request your Ld. Authority to provide an opportunity to be heard before passing an order u/s.154

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2575/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

u/s. 234A & 234B has to be re-considered as per the Act. From the above it is clear that there has been mistake apparent on record which need to be rectified in accordance to the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. I further request your Ld. Authority to provide an opportunity to be heard before passing an order u/s.154

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2573/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

u/s. 234A & 234B has to be re-considered as per the Act. From the above it is clear that there has been mistake apparent on record which need to be rectified in accordance to the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. I further request your Ld. Authority to provide an opportunity to be heard before passing an order u/s.154

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2571/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

u/s. 234A & 234B has to be re-considered as per the Act. From the above it is clear that there has been mistake apparent on record which need to be rectified in accordance to the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. I further request your Ld. Authority to provide an opportunity to be heard before passing an order u/s.154

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 2576/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

u/s. 234A & 234B has to be re-considered as per the Act. From the above it is clear that there has been mistake apparent on record which need to be rectified in accordance to the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. I further request your Ld. Authority to provide an opportunity to be heard before passing an order u/s.154

VIRGO PROPERTIES P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1208/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Srinivasan, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 13.07.2017
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 154(3)

House, Thirumurthy Street, Corporate Circle – 3(2), T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 017. [PAN: AABCV 9182A] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Shri Balasubramanian, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Srinivasan, Jt. CIT ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : 13.07.2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of hearing : घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement 31.07.2017 : आदेश

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)

house property income, income from other sources and thereafter income from capital gains which is in accordance with the provisions of Section 71 of the Act overlooking the narrow scope of the provisions in section 154 of the Act. 5. The CIT (Appeals) erred in not adjudicating the issue raised with regard to the narrow scope of the provisions

MRS. BABU SHEENY,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-6(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3206/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George K, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3206/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mrs. Babu Sheeny, The Income Tax Officer, New No. 719, Old No. 666, V. Non Corporate Ward -6(1), T.H. Road, Thiruvottiyur, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 019. [Pan: Aawps-4485-R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Mr. K. Ravi, Ca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025

For Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

rectification application u/s. 154 of the Act and had requested to reprocess the return of income stating that these income have been offered under the head income from house property

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 373/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 371/CHNY/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 375/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 395/CHNY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 372/CHNY/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 394/CHNY/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much

SANJAY CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 396/CHNY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM., SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 393/CHNY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 374/CHNY/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much

REKHA CHAWLA,SALEM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM, SALEM

In the result, appeals filed by both assessees in ITA Nos

ITA 392/CHNY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha.G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.392 & 393/Chny/2021 &

For Respondent: Mr.S.R.Karuppusamy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263

Rectification petition goes to the root of the matter as non-consideration of the submissions relating to the assumption of jurisdiction, amounts to mistake apparent on the face of record. 6. The order passed by the Assessing officer which was the subject matter of the main appeal before the CIT(A) was clearly barred by limitation in as much