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.

152 results for “house property”+ Section 23(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,454Delhi2,236Bangalore836Karnataka647Jaipur468Chennai465Ahmedabad446Kolkata343Hyderabad318Chandigarh245Pune236Surat208Indore173Cochin152Telangana143Amritsar100Visakhapatnam91Rajkot80Raipur75Lucknow64SC59Calcutta58Cuttack53Nagpur45Patna28Guwahati23Agra22Rajasthan16Jodhpur16Varanasi13Allahabad11Kerala10Orissa7Dehradun4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3Andhra Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana2Ranchi2Gauhati2T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1Panaji1Jabalpur1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 25064Addition to Income46Section 153C30Section 143(3)28Section 37(1)26Section 26318Section 80G16Section 153A12Section 80G(5)10

M/S PERINGATTU HEALTH FOUNDATION PRIVATE,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO CORPORATE WARD 2(3), KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 23/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathi Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 12Section 143(3)Section 22Section 24(1)(b)

property, whether let or not, is liable to be assessed at it’s annual value, defined as the rent reasonably expected on being let from year to year (s. 23(1)(a)). Sections 23(1)(b) and (c) provide for adjustment to the said value on account of actual rent, received or receivable, being either higher or lower, the latter

Showing 1–20 of 152 · Page 1 of 8

...
Deduction10
Unexplained Investment9
Disallowance8

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 202/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

M/S POPULAR FINANCE COMPANY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CIR-1,, THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 204/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

M/S.POPULAR FINANCE,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 203/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

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

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

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

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

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

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

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

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

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

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

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

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

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

c) If not covered by section 37(1) of the IT. Act, whether the interest expenditure disallowable either in total or in part under section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income Tax Act? d) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Assessing Officer correctly assessed the interest income received from partners under the head “income from Profits

MR.THOMAS DANIEL,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 68/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.68/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15

Section 194ASection 40Section 44A

23. Despite this narrow interpretation of section 40(a)(ia),the question still survives if the Tribunal in case of M/s Merilyn Shipping & Transports vs. ACIT (supra) was accurate in its opinion. In this context, we would like to examine two aspects. Firstly, what would be the correct interpretation of the said provision. Secondly, whether our such understanding

SRI. ELDHOSE K. VARGHESE,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THEDCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, appeals for assessment year 2006-07 to 2008-09 and 2010-11 are allowed while the appeals of the assessee for assessment year 2009-10, 2011-12 and 2012-13 are partly allowed

ITA 261/COCH/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal & Shri George George K.

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 234A

House, Central Circle-1, Mekkadambu – P.O. Ernakulam. Muvattupuzha. PAN:AAFPE 4655 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri T. M. Sreedharan Respondent by Shri Sudhanshu Shekhar, CIT, D.R. Date of hearing 27/09/2017 Date of pronouncement 04/10/2017 ORDER PER P. K. BANSAL, V.P. All these appeals have been filed by the assessee against the consolidated order of CIT(A) dated 31/03/2016

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 524/COCH/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

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

Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 27I(1)Section 27I(1)(c)

23 lakhs was given as advance for the properties purchased by their father out of the money sent to him by Demand Drafts by his sons. In their absence, he was looking after their affairs here. But he expired during the FY 2006-07. Though the appellant requested for some time to gather those details, the same was denied

DR. K.E. MOORTHY,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. DCIT, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 637/COCH/2008[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin18 Jul 2019AY 2000-01

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

Section 132Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

23,910/- over and above the salary income of Rs.1,52,627/- had resulted in duplication. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. For the assessment year 2000-01 to 2001-02, there was seized material showing the collection of unaccounted receipts in the form of register found in the document marked

MR. PREM MUKUNDAN ,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ITO WARD-2(2), KOCHI, KOCHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 790/COCH/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Mar 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George George K. (Judicial Member), Ms. Padmavathy S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Padmanabhan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 192Section 199Section 250

house property and interest. In the said return of income the assessee had declared interest income of his deceased wife from SBI and Canara Bank and claimed TDS credit on the same. Intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act was issued on 13.02.2013, disallowing TDS credit in the name of assessee’s wife. 4. Aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before

PALLATH NAFEESA,MALAPPURAM vs. ITO, TIRUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee allowed

ITA 118/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Pallath Nafeesa The Income Tax Officer Poolakkodan House Tirur Athirumada, Punnathala Vs. Tirur, Malappuram 676552 [Pan: Alipn9300R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shaji Paulose, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R
Section 10(37)Section 145ASection 194ASection 197Section 28Section 34Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

House Tirur Athirumada, Punnathala vs. Tirur, Malappuram 676552 [PAN: ALIPN9300R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Shaji Paulose, CA Respondent by: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 01.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 03.10.2024 O R D E R Per Bench This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

SMT.MITHRA PAUL,MUVATTUPUZHA vs. THE ITO,WD-1, THODUPUZHA

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

ITA 421/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153Section 263Section 44ASection 69B

23-08-2016 from my sister regarding gift by her and my mother to me during the F.Y, 2013-14.1 had also extracted and sold gravel earth from property at Kanikachal Village, Changanassery jointly held with my neice Nikitha for about Rs.35 lakhs in F.Y. 2013-14. Thanking you, 9 I.T.A. No 421/Coch/2019 Yours faithfully sd/- Mithra Paul From, Chithra

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 47/COCH/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2004-05

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

23. According to the ld. representative, Shri CBM Warrier, the assessing officer has taken Rs 15,04,891 as unexplained bank deposit. According to the ld. representative, the total deposit was Rs.19,54,243. The assessing officer has failed to take cheque deposit to the extent of Rs 4,48,828/-. The ld. representative very fairly submitted that the assessee

SRI.O.G.SUNIL,COCHIN vs. DCIT, ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 46/COCH/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2019AY 2003-04

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

23. According to the ld. representative, Shri CBM Warrier, the assessing officer has taken Rs 15,04,891 as unexplained bank deposit. According to the ld. representative, the total deposit was Rs.19,54,243. The assessing officer has failed to take cheque deposit to the extent of Rs 4,48,828/-. The ld. representative very fairly submitted that the assessee