Search: house property | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

182 results for “house property”+ Section 2(22)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,027 Delhi2,924 Bangalore1,038 Karnataka687 Chennai645 Jaipur548 Ahmedabad526 Hyderabad491 Kolkata478 Pune344 Chandigarh267 Indore243 Surat228 Visakhapatnam205 Cochin182 Telangana178 Amritsar123 Rajkot102 Raipur93 Lucknow83 Nagpur70 Cuttack66 Calcutta65 SC63 Agra42 Patna36 Guwahati32 Jodhpur26 Rajasthan21 Varanasi14 Dehradun13 Kerala12 Allahabad12 Orissa7 Jabalpur5 Ranchi5 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3 Himachal Pradesh2 Andhra Pradesh2 Gauhati2 Punjab & Haryana2 ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 J&K1

Key Topics

Section 25079 Section 143(3)39 Addition to Income33 Section 37(1)22 Section 26321 Section 153C18 Section 80G16 Section 153A15 Section 13213

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 803/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri G.Surendranath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 250Section 80PSection 8O

housing society; property chargeable under section 22. (2) An urban consumer society; (3) A society carrying on transport business; (4) A society

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Showing 1–20 of 182 · Page 1 of 10

...

Capital Gains10

ITA 802/COCH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri G.Surendranath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 250Section 80PSection 8O

housing society; property chargeable under section 22. (2) An urban consumer society; (3) A society carrying on transport business; (4) A society

THE KUNDARA PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, KOLLAM

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 805/COCH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri G.Surendranath Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 250Section 80PSection 8O

housing society; property chargeable under section 22. (2) An urban consumer society; (3) A society carrying on transport business; (4) A society

THE DIT ( EXEMPTION), KOCHI vs. M/S.INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COCHIN BRANCH, COCHIN

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 507/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

properties which were owned by doctors thereby making a profit. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee was not doing any business, when the Assessing Officer found that the assessee has treated the rental income as business income in its books of accounts. 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee is a society

THE ADIT ( EXEMPTION), KOCHI vs. M/S.INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COCHIN BRANCH, COCHIN

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 327/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

properties which were owned by doctors thereby making a profit. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee was not doing any business, when the Assessing Officer found that the assessee has treated the rental income as business income in its books of accounts. 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee is a society

THE ACIT, CORP CIRCLE-1(2), KOCHI vs. M/S.KNOWELL REALTORS INDIA P. LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

ITA 192/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Santosh P. Abraham, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 268A

2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee-company, incorporated on 27.09.1996 (as M.A.Agencies India Private Limited), purchased land in FY 1996- 1997, commencing construction thereon in the following year, which continued up ITA Nos.192-193/Coch/2019 (AY 2012-2013 & 2015-16) Asst. CIT v. Knowell Realtors India (P.) Ltd. to FY 2003-2004, even as improvements thereto continued

THE ACIT, CORP CIRCLE-1(2), KOCHI vs. M/S.KNOWELL REALTORS INDIA P. LTD, KOCHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals are allowed

ITA 193/COCH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Santosh P. Abraham, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 268A

2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee-company, incorporated on 27.09.1996 (as M.A.Agencies India Private Limited), purchased land in FY 1996- 1997, commencing construction thereon in the following year, which continued up ITA Nos.192-193/Coch/2019 (AY 2012-2013 & 2015-16) Asst. CIT v. Knowell Realtors India (P.) Ltd. to FY 2003-2004, even as improvements thereto continued

SREENI PARAMESWARAN,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), KOCHI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 186/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dassreeni Parameswaran Asst. Cit, 7/42 – B5, Mystic Bells Corporate Circle- 2(1) Villa No. 1, Eroor Desom Kochi Nadama Village Vs. Ernakulam 682308 [Pan: Bahps6202C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms. K. Krishna, Advocate Respondent By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 18.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2023 O R D E R Per:Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Agitating The Order Dated 20.01.2023 By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac), Dismissing His Appeal Contesting His Assessment Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter "The Act") Dated 28.03.2016 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12. 2. The Only Issue Arising In The Instant Appeal Is The Validity Or Otherwise In Law, In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Of The Addition By Way Of Deemed Dividend U/S. 2(22)(E) Of The Act For Rs. 62,44,215,Since Confirmed In The First Appeal.

For Appellant: Ms. K. Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 2(22)(e)

property sold during the current year being a Villa. Thus, though a matter of clarification/verification, would not have any implication for our purpose inasmuch as the balance in this account as at the beginning of the year (01.04.2010) is reckoned at nil. Page 4 ITANo. 186/Coch/2023 (AY 2011-12) Sreeni Parameswaran vs. Asst. CIT 4.5 The debits for the current

THRISSUR DISTRICT POLICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 409/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri M.Ramdas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. A.R

Section 154Section 250Section 253(5)

House Property to be calculated as per the provisions of section 22 -27 of the Act. Income from Other Sources i) The Interest received exclusively from the credit facilities provided to its members will be treated as operating Profit of the Co-operative society& eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2

THRISSUR DISTRICT POLICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 408/COCH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri M.Ramdas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. A.R

Section 154Section 250Section 253(5)

House Property to be calculated as per the provisions of section 22 -27 of the Act. Income from Other Sources i) The Interest received exclusively from the credit facilities provided to its members will be treated as operating Profit of the Co-operative society& eligible for deduction u/s 80P(2

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 71/COCH/2018[2004-05]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

22-03-2013. The relevant part of the decision is as under: I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 "A bare reading of section 37(1) clearly shows that any expenditure which is not in the nature described u/s 30 to 36 and not being capital expenditure or personal expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, PATHANAMTHITTA

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 69/COCH/2018[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

22-03-2013. The relevant part of the decision is as under: I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 "A bare reading of section 37(1) clearly shows that any expenditure which is not in the nature described u/s 30 to 36 and not being capital expenditure or personal expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 72/COCH/2018[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

22-03-2013. The relevant part of the decision is as under: I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 "A bare reading of section 37(1) clearly shows that any expenditure which is not in the nature described u/s 30 to 36 and not being capital expenditure or personal expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 73/COCH/2018[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

22-03-2013. The relevant part of the decision is as under: I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 "A bare reading of section 37(1) clearly shows that any expenditure which is not in the nature described u/s 30 to 36 and not being capital expenditure or personal expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS,, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 74/COCH/2018[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

22-03-2013. The relevant part of the decision is as under: I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 "A bare reading of section 37(1) clearly shows that any expenditure which is not in the nature described u/s 30 to 36 and not being capital expenditure or personal expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose

THE ACIT, THIRUVALLA vs. M/S.MUTHOOT PROPERTIES & INVESTMENTS, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 75/COCH/2018[2005-06]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

22-03-2013. The relevant part of the decision is as under: I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 "A bare reading of section 37(1) clearly shows that any expenditure which is not in the nature described u/s 30 to 36 and not being capital expenditure or personal expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose

DCIT, THIRUVALLA vs. MAR GREGORIOUS MEMORIAL MUTHOOT MEDICAL CENTRE, KOZHENCHERRY

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 70/COCH/2018[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Cochin21 Feb 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 45Section 57

22-03-2013. The relevant part of the decision is as under: I.T.A. Nos. 69-72/Coch/2018 & 73-75/Coch/2018 "A bare reading of section 37(1) clearly shows that any expenditure which is not in the nature described u/s 30 to 36 and not being capital expenditure or personal expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose

THE ACIT CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SMT.GRACY BABU, ADOOR P.O.

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 239/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

house property; (D) Profits and gains of business or profession; (E) Capital gains; (F) income from other sources unless otherwise, provided in the Act. (15) Section 56 provides for the chargeability of income of every kind which has not to be excluded from the total income under the Act, only if it is not chargeable to income-tax under

THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM vs. SRI.JOSE THOMAS, ADOOR

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 238/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

house property; (D) Profits and gains of business or profession; (E) Capital gains; (F) income from other sources unless otherwise, provided in the Act. (15) Section 56 provides for the chargeability of income of every kind which has not to be excluded from the total income under the Act, only if it is not chargeable to income-tax under

CARMEL EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT,CEN- CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeals of the assesses in ITA no

ITA 306/COCH/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

house property; (D) Profits and gains of business or profession; (E) Capital gains; (F) income from other sources unless otherwise, provided in the Act. (15) Section 56 provides for the chargeability of income of every kind which has not to be excluded from the total income under the Act, only if it is not chargeable to income-tax under