Search: house property

4 results for “house property”+ Section 171clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)7 Section 143(3)5 Addition to Income4 Penalty3 Section 133A2 Section 1482 Section 692 Section 139(1)2 Unexplained Investment2

MR.P.C.JOSE,,COCHIN vs. DCIT, COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed, and the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 54/COCH/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Apr 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasp.C. Jose Deputy Commissioner Of Prop. Brothers Agencies Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Jews Street Vs. Kochi Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Deputy Commissioner Of P.C. Jose Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Prop. Brothers Agencies Kochi Vs. Jews Street Ernakulam 682031 [Pan: Abbpj8250F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 29.12.2010 for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. ITA Nos. 54& 84/Coch/2012 (AY: 2008-09) P.C. Jose v. Dy CIT / Dy. CIT v. P.C. Jose Ex-parte Order 2. The appeals were heard at length on 10.08.2023, covering all the issues, including the principal one, being the assessment

MR.P.C.JOSE,,COCHIN vs. DCIT, COCHIN

MR.BABU MATHEW,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

MR.P.C.JOSE,,COCHIN vs. DCIT, COCHIN

MR.BABU MATHEW,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

MR.BABU MATHEW,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

SRI.ALAVIKUTTY,VENGARA,MALAPPURAM vs. THE DCIT, CALICUT