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.

335 results for “house property”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi929Mumbai878Jaipur336Chennai335Hyderabad274Bangalore264Chandigarh161Ahmedabad146Pune142Indore140Cochin138Kolkata100Amritsar98Visakhapatnam96Rajkot69Surat66Nagpur64Raipur47Lucknow35Calcutta34Agra34Guwahati32Allahabad23Cuttack23Jodhpur18Patna18Karnataka10Telangana8Dehradun6Panaji4Jabalpur4Varanasi4SC4Gauhati1Punjab & Haryana1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 14894Addition to Income82Section 143(3)51Section 13243Section 153A41Section 14735Section 6931Section 6829Disallowance29

P RAMASAMY,KUMBAKONAM vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), KUMBAKONAM

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

ITA 3156/CHNY/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3156/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2001-02 Mr.P.Ramasamy, V. The Income Tax Officer, No.27/29, 2Nd Street, Ward-I(1), Thiruvalluvar Nagar, Kumbakonam. Kumbakonam. [Pan: Aaipr 7169 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)

investment in house property and also unexplained investment in construction of house property. The AO after considering relevant submissions of the assessee

A LATHA,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT CETRAL CIRCLE - 2,, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 39/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 335 · Page 1 of 17

...
Section 153C28
Unexplained Investment24
House Property20
ITAT Chennai
31 Mar 2022
AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 1223/Chny/2018, 3 & 39/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Smt. A. Latha, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of No.112, Gopal Layout Income Tax, Ponniayarajapuram Central Circle-2 Coimbatore-641 002. Coimbatore. Pan: Abvpl 0483E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: 07.03.2022
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

unexplained investments in house property for the assessment year 2015-16. We find that an identical issue has been considered

A LATHA,COIMBATORE vs. -, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 1223/Chny/2018, 3 & 39/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Smt. A. Latha, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of No.112, Gopal Layout Income Tax, Ponniayarajapuram Central Circle-2 Coimbatore-641 002. Coimbatore. Pan: Abvpl 0483E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: 07.03.2022
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

unexplained investments in house property for the assessment year 2015-16. We find that an identical issue has been considered

SMT A LATHA ,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, COIMBATORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 1223/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 1223/Chny/2018, 3 & 39/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Smt. A. Latha, Vs Assistant Commissioner Of No.112, Gopal Layout Income Tax, Ponniayarajapuram Central Circle-2 Coimbatore-641 002. Coimbatore. Pan: Abvpl 0483E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: 07.03.2022
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

unexplained investments in house property for the assessment year 2015-16. We find that an identical issue has been considered

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. ERICH NESSEL HAUF, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 280/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jul 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri. G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Supriya Pal, IRS, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. P.J. Pardiwalla, and Shri
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

house property and its sources. In the absence of any documentary proof showing that the amounts shown are not invested during the year under' consideration, the same is treated as unexplained

T.NAGOOR MEERAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 1025/CHNY/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT

unexplained investment in the assessee’s hand. Therefore, the ld DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5.4 With regard to the advance made at Rs. 1,40,000/- towards the property at Malayathamman Koil Street, the ld AR pleaded that this investment was considered in the hands of Mrs. Asifa Bhanuin her assessment made for the assessment year

T.NAGOOR MEERAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 1028/CHNY/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT

unexplained investment in the assessee’s hand. Therefore, the ld DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5.4 With regard to the advance made at Rs. 1,40,000/- towards the property at Malayathamman Koil Street, the ld AR pleaded that this investment was considered in the hands of Mrs. Asifa Bhanuin her assessment made for the assessment year

T.NAGOOR MEERAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 1024/CHNY/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT

unexplained investment in the assessee’s hand. Therefore, the ld DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5.4 With regard to the advance made at Rs. 1,40,000/- towards the property at Malayathamman Koil Street, the ld AR pleaded that this investment was considered in the hands of Mrs. Asifa Bhanuin her assessment made for the assessment year

T.NAGOOR MEERAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 1026/CHNY/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT

unexplained investment in the assessee’s hand. Therefore, the ld DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5.4 With regard to the advance made at Rs. 1,40,000/- towards the property at Malayathamman Koil Street, the ld AR pleaded that this investment was considered in the hands of Mrs. Asifa Bhanuin her assessment made for the assessment year

T.NAGOOR MEERAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 1027/CHNY/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT

unexplained investment in the assessee’s hand. Therefore, the ld DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5.4 With regard to the advance made at Rs. 1,40,000/- towards the property at Malayathamman Koil Street, the ld AR pleaded that this investment was considered in the hands of Mrs. Asifa Bhanuin her assessment made for the assessment year

M/S. SHREE BATTERY HOUSE,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2594/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed

M/S. SHREE BATTERY HOUSE,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2587/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed

SHANTHILAL D JAIN,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2396/CHNY/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed

M/S. SHREE BATTERY HOUSE,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2592/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed

SHANTHILAL D JAIN,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2398/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed

M/S. SHREE BATTERY HOUSE,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2591/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed

M/S. SHREE BATTERY HOUSE,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2598/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed

SHANTHILAL D JAIN,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2360/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed

SHANTHILAL D JAIN,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2358/CHNY/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed

SHANTHILAL D JAIN,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (1),, CHENNAI

2400/CHNY/2019

ITA 2359/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. M.L. Meena

Section 153ASection 271A

unexplained investment in property. We find that this is a common feature in all the assessees cases and once this is the fact, we noted that the AO has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s.153A or 153C of the Act in the above mentioned cases for the above 8 appeals. Hence, this common issue in all these appeals of assessee is dismissed