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.

277 results for “house property”+ Section 81clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,454Mumbai1,218Karnataka545Bangalore487Chennai277Ahmedabad275Jaipur249Kolkata205Hyderabad195Surat171Cochin135Chandigarh121Indore119Pune95Telangana80Raipur60Calcutta54Amritsar50Visakhapatnam47Rajkot40Lucknow33Nagpur33Cuttack24SC22Guwahati11Agra9Jodhpur8Rajasthan6Dehradun3Allahabad3Orissa3Ranchi2Patna2Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1Varanasi1Kerala1

Key Topics

Addition to Income57Section 143(3)53Section 14847Section 14A37Disallowance35Section 8028Section 14727Deduction25Section 194H24Section 80I

THAJUNNISSA BEGUM ,CHENNAI vs. ITO,NON CORPORATE WARD -10(4), CHENNAI

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

ITA 196/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 196/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mrs. Thajunnissa Begum, Income Tax Officer, No. 3, Prasanna Vinayagar V. Non Corporate Ward -10(4), Kovil St., Chennai. 235, Poonamalle High Road, Chennai – 600 029. [Pan: Adcpt-2186-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Y. Sridhar, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16.02.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 54

81,742/-. The said property has been acquired by the assessee in the year 1987 and further made a construction in the year 1997. The assessee had also purchased new residential house property on 30.08.2012 for a consideration of Rs. 64,80,100/- and put up further construction at a cost of Rs. 62,23,012/-. From the above facts

Showing 1–20 of 277 · Page 1 of 14

...
23
Section 13222
Capital Gains17

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

81 taxmann.com 193(SC) had elaborately discussed as to under what circumstances rental income is to be brought to tax under the head ‘income from house property’ or under the head ‘Profits and Gains from Business of Profession’ , in this decision the Hon’ble Supreme Court has distinguished its own decisions in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments

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

81 taxmann.com 193(SC) had elaborately discussed as to under what circumstances rental income is to be brought to tax under the head ‘income from house property’ or under the head ‘Profits and Gains from Business of Profession’ , in this decision the Hon’ble Supreme Court has distinguished its own decisions in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments

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 and business. 7.2 After considering the submissions of the assessee the ld. CIT(A) has observed as under: “I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant. As pointed out by the appellant that the said expenses have to be incurred for carrying out his business, irrespective of the quantum of revenue/turnover involved. If this proportionate method

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 and business. 7.2 After considering the submissions of the assessee the ld. CIT(A) has observed as under: “I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant. As pointed out by the appellant that the said expenses have to be incurred for carrying out his business, irrespective of the quantum of revenue/turnover involved. If this proportionate method

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 and business. 7.2 After considering the submissions of the assessee the ld. CIT(A) has observed as under: “I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant. As pointed out by the appellant that the said expenses have to be incurred for carrying out his business, irrespective of the quantum of revenue/turnover involved. If this proportionate method

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 and business. 7.2 After considering the submissions of the assessee the ld. CIT(A) has observed as under: “I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant. As pointed out by the appellant that the said expenses have to be incurred for carrying out his business, irrespective of the quantum of revenue/turnover involved. If this proportionate method

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

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

ITA 2577/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

81,816/-\nB. Income from House property Rs. 5,87,998/-\nas returned\nAdd: Addition to deemed rental income Rs. 9,00,000/-\n(as in para 10.1 & 10.4)\nAdd: Disallowance u/s 24(b) (as in Paras 11.1 & 11.2) Rs. 2,00,000/- Rs. 16,87,998/-\nC. Long Term Capital Gain as returned Rs. 7,13,052/-\nD. Income

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

ITA 2570/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2011-12
Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

81,816/-\nB. Income from House property Rs. 5,87,998/-\nas returned\nAdd: Addition to deemed rental income Rs. 9,00,000/-\n(as in para 10.1 & 10.4)\nAdd: Disallowance u/s 24(b) (as in Rs. 2,00,000/-\nParas 11.1 & 11.2)\nRs.\n16,87,998/-\nRs.\n7,13,052/-\nC. Long Term Capital Gain as returned\nD. Income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE SUBRAMANIAN SARAVANAN, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Re

ITA 1132/CHNY/2023[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 54F

81,067/- was allowed as relief under was allowed as relief under Section 54 of the said Act. Section 54 of the said Act. 10. Following question of law question of law are noted to have been admitted admitted by the Hon’ble Madras High Court Court on the aforesaid facts, as under: as under:- i. When capital gain arises

C.ARYAMA SUNDARAM,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1208/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Durai Pandian, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(1)

house and the total cost of construction worked out to Rs. 2,77,39,045/-. Where, the Ld. AR arguments that land purchased on 14.05.2007 should be part of exemption allowed u/s. 54 of the Act. The Ld. AO is of the opinion that the entire capital gain was not invested in the property before due date

S.SAROJA,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORPORAE CIRCLE-19(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 418/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 418/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 S. Saroja, Deputy Commissioner Of Door No. 47, Pandian Street, V. Income Tax, Sankaran Avenue, Velachery, Non Corporate Circle – 19(1), Chennai – 600 042. Chennai. [Pan: Baeps-1299-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Sakthivel, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31.05.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri. B. Sakthivel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 270A

81 years, engaged Accountant for filing his return of income and submitted all details. The Accountant who filed return of income by inadvertent error disclosed annual value of the house property at Rs. 5,40,000/- instead of Rs. 8,40,000/-. In respect of interest income, the assessee on bonafide belief declared interest income under the head income from

SHRI SHANTHILAL MOVJI BHAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 6 (4),, CHENNAI

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 2269/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2267 To 2270/Chny/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Shri Shanthilal Movji Bhai Thakker The Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ 88/A, Dr.Allagappa Road, Corporate Ward-6(4), Vs. Purasawalkam, Chennai-600 084. Chennai. थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacpt-9083-C (अपीलाथ-/Appellant) : (01थ- / Respondent) अपीलाथ-कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D.Anand- Advocate 01थ-कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G.Johnson – Ld. Addl. Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 12/10/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 03/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand- AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Johnson – Ld. Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 269USection 27Section 36(1)(iii)

Section 269UA, the assessee would be deemed owner of the property. Accordingly, the lease income earned therefrom was to be assessed as ‘Income from House Property’ which would be eligible for statutory deduction of 30%. Finally, the aforesaid income was assessed as ‘Income from House Property’ and Ld. AO also made interest disallowance

SHRI SHANTHILAL MOVJI BHAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 6 (4),, CHENNAI

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 2268/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2267 To 2270/Chny/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Shri Shanthilal Movji Bhai Thakker The Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ 88/A, Dr.Allagappa Road, Corporate Ward-6(4), Vs. Purasawalkam, Chennai-600 084. Chennai. थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacpt-9083-C (अपीलाथ-/Appellant) : (01थ- / Respondent) अपीलाथ-कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D.Anand- Advocate 01थ-कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G.Johnson – Ld. Addl. Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 12/10/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 03/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand- AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Johnson – Ld. Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 269USection 27Section 36(1)(iii)

Section 269UA, the assessee would be deemed owner of the property. Accordingly, the lease income earned therefrom was to be assessed as ‘Income from House Property’ which would be eligible for statutory deduction of 30%. Finally, the aforesaid income was assessed as ‘Income from House Property’ and Ld. AO also made interest disallowance

SHRI SHANTHILAL MOVJI BHAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 6 (4),, CHENNAI

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 2270/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Nov 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2267 To 2270/Chny/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2014-15 To 2016-17) Shri Shanthilal Movji Bhai Thakker The Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ 88/A, Dr.Allagappa Road, Corporate Ward-6(4), Vs. Purasawalkam, Chennai-600 084. Chennai. थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacpt-9083-C (अपीलाथ-/Appellant) : (01थ- / Respondent) अपीलाथ-कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D.Anand- Advocate 01थ-कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G.Johnson – Ld. Addl. Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 12/10/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 03/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand- AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Johnson – Ld. Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 269USection 27Section 36(1)(iii)

Section 269UA, the assessee would be deemed owner of the property. Accordingly, the lease income earned therefrom was to be assessed as ‘Income from House Property’ which would be eligible for statutory deduction of 30%. Finally, the aforesaid income was assessed as ‘Income from House Property’ and Ld. AO also made interest disallowance

SHRI SHANTHILAL MOVJI BHAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 6 (4),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1346/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1344, 1345 & 1346/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 22Section 23Section 27

81 Taxmann.com 193), there may be instances where a particular income^ may appear to fall in more than one head. On the facts of a particular ) case, income has to be either treated as income from the house property or as the business income. Tests which are to be applied for determining the real nature of income are laid down

SHRI SHANTHILAL MOVJI BHAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 6 (4),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1345/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1344, 1345 & 1346/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 22Section 23Section 27

81 Taxmann.com 193), there may be instances where a particular income^ may appear to fall in more than one head. On the facts of a particular ) case, income has to be either treated as income from the house property or as the business income. Tests which are to be applied for determining the real nature of income are laid down

SHRI SHANTHILAL MOVJI BHAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 6 (4),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1344/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1344, 1345 & 1346/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 22Section 23Section 27

81 Taxmann.com 193), there may be instances where a particular income^ may appear to fall in more than one head. On the facts of a particular ) case, income has to be either treated as income from the house property or as the business income. Tests which are to be applied for determining the real nature of income are laid down

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

house property”. The A.O. held that the assessee in earlier assessment years has claimed the income from letting out of the property as business income. The assessee cannot arbitrarily change the head of the income. The Assessing Officer treated the rental income from property under the head “business income”. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 24.12.2009, the assessee preferred

R.UPENDRAN (HUF),CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1188/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.V.Sreenivasan, JICIT, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54(1)

81/- lakhs at Flat T2, GLand Marvel Lakshmi Nivas’ Ill Floor, Old Door No.25, New No.2/8, 7th Main Road, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai-28. The assessee filed its return of income on 21.03.2012 and admitted the capital gains derived from this sale transaction at `37,48,593/-. The assessee commenced construction of third floor on 23.01.2009 , which was completed