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.

24 results for “house property”+ Section 148Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai57Mumbai56Jaipur32Delhi24Pune16Bangalore16Visakhapatnam12Chandigarh11Ahmedabad10Raipur8Rajkot7Indore6Hyderabad6Agra5Lucknow5Kolkata2Ranchi1Surat1Amritsar1Guwahati1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 14762Section 14852Section 148A33Addition to Income21Section 6816Natural Justice14Section 69A13Section 14413House Property13Reassessment

MUKESH,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 43(1), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1489/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Mukesh Vs. Ito 129, Ganga Ram Panna, Ward- 43(1) Kair, Najafgarh Delhi Delhi Pan: Apvpm4449M Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Suresh Kumar Gupta, Ca Revenue By Sh. Shankar Lalverma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 Order

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 2Section 54

148A of the Act and issued a fresh notice under Section 148 of the Act on 08/07/2022. In response, the Assessee filed a return of income on 02/08/2022, declaring a total income of Rs.1,33,780/-, after claiming a deduction under Section 54 of the Act of Rs.74,55,000/- against the capital gain of Rs.75,88,778/-. Thereafter

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

13
Section 142(1)9
Section 2509

CHIRAG KIRPAL,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 656/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarchirag Kirpal, Vs. Acit, C/O. Anuj Bhatia, C-3, Bali International Taxation, Nagar, New Raja Garden, Gurgaon New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Bwxpk8788D Assessee By : Shri. S. K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri. S. K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. S. Nethrapal, CIT DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

property for Rs. 65 lakhs during the year under consideration. Since the said transaction is more than the maximum amount not chargeable to tax and Assessee being a non-filer of income tax return, notice under section 148 of the Act stood issued to the Assessee on 29-03-2023 by ITO (International Tax), Gurgoan. In response to the said

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 63(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 1435/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2012-2013
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

house property income is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds.\n7.\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in charging interest

BRAHAM SINGH,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT , DELHI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4756/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarita No. 4757/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ita No.4756/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Braham Singh, Vs Assessment Unit, House N0.57, Dhansa . Income Tax Department Raota, South West Delhi Delhi Pin: 1100 73 Delhi. Pan: Fhmps9910M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri I.P. Bansal & VivekFor Respondent: Shri Amit Shukla, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 194ASection 194I

House N0.57, Dhansa . Income Tax Department Raota, South West Delhi Delhi PIN: 1100 73 Delhi. PAN: FHMPS9910M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: S/Shri I.P. Bansal & Vivek Bansal, Advs. Department by: Shri Amit Shukla, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 08.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 08.05.2025 O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeals filed by the Appellant/assessee are against

BRAHAM SINGH,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4757/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Vimal Kumarita No. 4757/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ita No.4756/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Braham Singh, Vs Assessment Unit, House N0.57, Dhansa . Income Tax Department Raota, South West Delhi Delhi Pin: 1100 73 Delhi. Pan: Fhmps9910M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri I.P. Bansal & VivekFor Respondent: Shri Amit Shukla, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 194ASection 194I

House N0.57, Dhansa . Income Tax Department Raota, South West Delhi Delhi PIN: 1100 73 Delhi. PAN: FHMPS9910M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: S/Shri I.P. Bansal & Vivek Bansal, Advs. Department by: Shri Amit Shukla, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 08.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 08.05.2025 O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeals filed by the Appellant/assessee are against

MR. ABHISHEK DIXIT,GURUGRAM vs. DDIT/ADIT( IN TAX.), NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 414/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 147Section 148Section 151

house property. The assessee had claimed exempt income of Rs. 35,43,224/-. 3. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that the AO had reasons to believe that an income chargeable to tax amounting to Rs. 2,87,04,714/- had escaped assessment in the hands of the assessee for the year under consideration within the meaning of section

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 1432/DEL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Sunita Bhardwaj, Vs Acit, 1/2, Taj Apartments, Circle-63(1), R.K.Puram, Sector-12, Delhi Delhi-110022. Pan-Ahfpb1928E Appellant Respondent

Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

house property income is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 7. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in charging interest

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 1434/DEL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Sunita Bhardwaj, Vs Acit, 1/2, Taj Apartments, Circle-63(1), R.K.Puram, Sector-12, Delhi Delhi-110022. Pan-Ahfpb1928E Appellant Respondent

Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

house property income is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 7. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in charging interest

SUMAN KISHORE,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 1434/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Sunita Bhardwaj, Vs Acit, 1/2, Taj Apartments, Circle-63(1), R.K.Puram, Sector-12, Delhi Delhi-110022. Pan-Ahfpb1928E Appellant Respondent

Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

house property income is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 7. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in charging interest

SONEA DHIR,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-32 (1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3073/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2011-12
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 250Section 50C

housing loan receipts. As per bank statement of account\nпо. 00321000103067 in the name of Smt. Sonea Dhir with HDFC Bank for\nthe period 18/01/2012, the assessee made payments to M/s. United Air\nProducts Pvt. Ltd. in the following manner:\n\n19/01/2011\n21/02/2012\n11/03/2011\n26/03/2011\n05/04/2011\n\nRs.50,00,000/-\nRs.1,50,00,000/-\nRs.1,50,00,000/-\nRs.2

ASHISH GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-36(1), DELHI

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

ITA 2164/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amol Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT- DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

148A(d) on 27.07.2022 without giving sufficient time to the assessee for furnishing a reply, rendering the entire reassessment procedurally defective in a prejudiced and arbitrary conduct despite time sought by the assessee on 14.06.2022 and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 6. That the Ld. AO has erred in initiating reassessment proceedings in a mechanical manner

ASHISH GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-36(1), DELHI

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

ITA 2162/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amol Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT- DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

148A(d) on 27.07.2022 without giving sufficient time to the assessee for furnishing a reply, rendering the entire reassessment procedurally defective in a prejudiced and arbitrary conduct despite time sought by the assessee on 14.06.2022 and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 6. That the Ld. AO has erred in initiating reassessment proceedings in a mechanical manner

ASHISH GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-36(1), DELHI

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

ITA 2160/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amol Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT- DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

148A(d) on 27.07.2022 without giving sufficient time to the assessee for furnishing a reply, rendering the entire reassessment procedurally defective in a prejudiced and arbitrary conduct despite time sought by the assessee on 14.06.2022 and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 6. That the Ld. AO has erred in initiating reassessment proceedings in a mechanical manner

ASHISH GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-36(1), DELHI

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

ITA 2161/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amol Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT- DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

148A(d) on 27.07.2022 without giving sufficient time to the assessee for furnishing a reply, rendering the entire reassessment procedurally defective in a prejudiced and arbitrary conduct despite time sought by the assessee on 14.06.2022 and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 6. That the Ld. AO has erred in initiating reassessment proceedings in a mechanical manner

ASHISH GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-36(1), DELHI

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

ITA 2163/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amol Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT- DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

148A(d) on 27.07.2022 without giving sufficient time to the assessee for furnishing a reply, rendering the entire reassessment procedurally defective in a prejudiced and arbitrary conduct despite time sought by the assessee on 14.06.2022 and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 6. That the Ld. AO has erred in initiating reassessment proceedings in a mechanical manner

BOOKING.COM B.V.,THE NETHERLANDS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2033/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarbooking.Com B.V. Vs. Acit, Circle -1(1)(2) Oosterdokskade 163, International Taxation, 1011 Dl, Amsterdam, The Civic Centre, Minto Road, Netherlands, New Delhi – 110002 Haryana 122002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aagcb2395A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. M.S. Nethrapal, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 151

148A(b) of the Act fail to establish how the Appellant's income is taxable under the Act or the DTAA except saying that there are receipts from India and those have been subjected to withholding. 23. There is no linkage between the material on record and the formation of the belief that the income chargeable to tax has escaped

SUNITA BHARDWAJ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 1433/DEL/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2014-2015
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

house property income is bad in law and against\nthe facts and circumstances of the case and the same is not\nsustainable on various legal and factual grounds.\n\n7. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld.\nCIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld.\nAO in charging

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2432/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra[A.Y 2017-18]

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakakr, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 115ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 234BSection 270ASection 9(1)(vi)

House Drive International Taxation San Diego, California, New Delhi The Skyview 10, 18’ F Survey No. 83, 1 Raidurg, Hyderabad, Telangana PAN: AAACQ 1484 H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakakr, Adv Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Adv Shri Naveen K. Agarwal, CA Shri Zoheb Bhalwani, CA Department By : Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 20.08.2024 Date

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1)(1) INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2556/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakakr, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 115ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 9(1)(vi)

House Drive International Taxation San Diego, California, New Delhi The Skyview 10, 18’ F Survey No. 83, 1 Raidurg, Hyderabad, Telangana PAN: AAACQ 1484 H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakakr, Adv Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Adv Shri Naveen K. Agarwal, CA Shri Zoheb Bhalwani, CA Department By : Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 21.08.2024 Date

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(1)(1), CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2557/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakakr, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 115ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 9(1)(vi)

House Drive International Taxation San Diego, California, New Delhi The Skyview 10, 18’ F Survey No. 83, 1 Raidurg, Hyderabad, Telangana PAN: AAACQ 1484 H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakakr, Adv Ms. Jasmin Amalsadvala, Adv Shri Naveen K. Agarwal, CA Shri Zoheb Bhalwani, CA Department By : Shri Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 21.08.2024 Date