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.

7 results for “house property”+ Section 364clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka438Delhi183Mumbai154Chandigarh72Jaipur42Ahmedabad39Calcutta35Lucknow23Bangalore23Raipur19Kolkata17Patna17Pune14Chennai14Hyderabad13Indore11Cochin7Nagpur6Telangana4SC4Agra3Andhra Pradesh1Amritsar1Allahabad1Cuttack1

Key Topics

Addition to Income7Section 405Deduction4Exemption4Section 194A3Section 143(3)3Section 12A3Section 113Section 2(15)3Section 11(1)

INFOPARKS KERALA,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE JT DIRECTOR OF IT (OSD) EXEM), COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 76/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

house property’ (IFHP), and cannot be treated as business income. Reliance stood also placed by it on the decisions in Addl.CIT v. Surat Art and Silk Mfrs. Assn. [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC); CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561 (SC); CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat [2014] 364 ITR 31 (SC); and DIT(E) v. Sabarmati Ashram Gaushala

3
Set Off of Losses3
Charitable Trust3

INFOPARKS KERALA,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE JT DIRECTOR OF IT (OSD) EXEM), COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 75/COCH/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

house property’ (IFHP), and cannot be treated as business income. Reliance stood also placed by it on the decisions in Addl.CIT v. Surat Art and Silk Mfrs. Assn. [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC); CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561 (SC); CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat [2014] 364 ITR 31 (SC); and DIT(E) v. Sabarmati Ashram Gaushala

INFOPARKS KERALA,COCHIN vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 77/COCH/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Rajakannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr.AR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

house property’ (IFHP), and cannot be treated as business income. Reliance stood also placed by it on the decisions in Addl.CIT v. Surat Art and Silk Mfrs. Assn. [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC); CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561 (SC); CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat [2014] 364 ITR 31 (SC); and DIT(E) v. Sabarmati Ashram Gaushala

HLL BIOTECH LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, WD-1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as the Stay Petitions filed

ITA 577/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

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

364/- for AY 2015-16. The assessee had reduced the interest income so received from the construction expenditure, since these funds are inextricably linked to the funds received for setting up of the vaccine plant as per the order of the Govt. of India and as per general policy/guidelines for any funds provided by the Government of India, any income

HLL BIOTECH LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, WD-1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as the Stay Petitions filed

ITA 578/COCH/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

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

364/- for AY 2015-16. The assessee had reduced the interest income so received from the construction expenditure, since these funds are inextricably linked to the funds received for setting up of the vaccine plant as per the order of the Govt. of India and as per general policy/guidelines for any funds provided by the Government of India, any income

HLL BIOTECH LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ITO, WD-1(1), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee as well as the Stay Petitions filed

ITA 576/COCH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

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

364/- for AY 2015-16. The assessee had reduced the interest income so received from the construction expenditure, since these funds are inextricably linked to the funds received for setting up of the vaccine plant as per the order of the Govt. of India and as per general policy/guidelines for any funds provided by the Government of India, any income

M/S.VIJAYA PALACE,,KOLLAM vs. THE ITO, KOLLAM

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

ITA 506/COCH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

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

Section 194ASection 40

House No.CPXII/83877C, Alappuzha. Thattassery, Chavara, Kollam-691 583. [PAN:AADFT 7970K] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee by Shri G. Surendranath Rao, CA Revenue by Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Sr. DR Date of hearing 21/03/2019 Date of pronouncement 03/04/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order