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.

128 results for “house property”+ Section 270A(9)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi128Mumbai72Chandigarh51Bangalore33Jaipur31Chennai28Hyderabad24Ahmedabad21Pune14Indore12Kolkata10Nagpur8Rajkot5Lucknow4Visakhapatnam4Raipur3Surat3Guwahati2Amritsar1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)26Addition to Income21Section 270A15Penalty13Double Taxation/DTAA11Section 80G9Deduction9House Property8Natural Justice7

RAJEEV VASUDEVA,DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 3(1) , DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2343/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: us, the only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the action of the learned AO in denying the claim of exemption under section 54F of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 54F

house property on the date of transfer of original capital asset and accordingly would be entitled for claim of exemption under section 54F of the Act in the sum of Rs.3,83,55,102/-. Accordingly, ground nos. 1 to 6 raised by the assessee are allowed. 8 | P a g e 13. Ground nos. 8 & 9 are general in nature

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

Showing 1–20 of 128 · Page 1 of 7

Section 92C6
Section 1486
Section 143(2)6

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 1Section 143Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(a)

270A(3) to section 27A(5) of the Act remain also totally un-complied with. The submission therefore is that, notices are vague and thus illegal Reliance is placed on the following judgments: i) W.P(C) 5111/2022 (Del) dated 28.03.2022 Schneider Electric South East Asia (HQ) Pte Ltd vs. ACIT ii) 288 Taxmam 768 (Del) Prem Brothers Infrastructure

SAS FASHIONS P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 4933/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, Adv [Virtual]For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(9)(a)Section 274

House property” income or not. The hon’ble Delhi High Court in Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP v. NFAC (supra) quashed the penalty u/s 270A on the ground that there was no misreporting and that in absence of details as to which limb of section 270A was attracted and how ingredient of sub-section (9

SMT. SUCHITA GOYAL,DELHI vs. PCIT,-15, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2860/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2860/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 बनाम Smt. Suchita Goyal, Pcit-15, Plot No.32, First Floor, Road No.43, Vs. Room No.1702, E-3 Block, Ashoka Park, Extension, S.P. Shivaji Park, Civic Centre, Minto Road, West Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Aafpg5320G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 24Section 263Section 270A(9)

section 270A(9) of the Act.” 2. Before us, the Ld. AR pointed out that the facts in this case were that a loan had been taken by the assessee for buying a property bearing no.1001, situated at 10th floor in one “R.G. Trade Tower, Netaji Subhash Place, (Pitampura, Delhi)”. The loan from this property was transferred to a subsequent

DCIT, DELHI vs. PERSONIV CONTACT CENTERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2860/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2860/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 बनाम Smt. Suchita Goyal, Pcit-15, Plot No.32, First Floor, Road No.43, Vs. Room No.1702, E-3 Block, Ashoka Park, Extension, S.P. Shivaji Park, Civic Centre, Minto Road, West Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Aafpg5320G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 24Section 263Section 270A(9)

section 270A(9) of the Act.” 2. Before us, the Ld. AR pointed out that the facts in this case were that a loan had been taken by the assessee for buying a property bearing no.1001, situated at 10th floor in one “R.G. Trade Tower, Netaji Subhash Place, (Pitampura, Delhi)”. The loan from this property was transferred to a subsequent

MADHURITTU PURI,UNITED KINGDOM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2)(2) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3063/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Sapra, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Vizay Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 234DSection 270A(2)

house in which he had 1/3rd share. The Ld. AO noted that this property was inherited by the assessee from his parents who had purchased the property in 1967/69. Since the property was purchased prior to 1st April, 2001, the assessee got it valued from a registered valuer and used the value for determining tax payable on long term capital

MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1640/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao & Parth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 270ASection 36(1)Section 40Section 56

270A of the Act read with section ('r.w.s.) 274 of the Act. The above grounds of appeal are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, vary, omit or substitute, withdraw any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. The Appellant

MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1483/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nageswar Rao & Parth, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 270ASection 36(1)Section 40Section 56

270A of the Act read with section ('r.w.s.) 274 of the Act. The above grounds of appeal are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, vary, omit or substitute, withdraw any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. The Appellant

LM WIND POWER AS ,DENMARK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 2(2)(1), DELHI

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4280/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Lm Wind Power As, Vs, Acit, Circle Juptervej 6, 6000 Kolding, International Tax 2(2)(1), Denmark – 999999. Delhi (Pan :Aabcl8590Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate Shri Aditya Vohra, Advocate Shri Arpitgoyal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2025 Date Of Order : 21.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appealpreferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Acit, Circle Int. Tax 2(2)(1), Delhi Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21 Pursuant To The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel U/S 144C(5) Of The Act Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Assessment Order Dated 29.07.2024 Passed Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (He Act") For Assessment Year 2020-21 Assessing The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.81,14, 14,893 Is Bad In Law, Void- Ab-Initio & Therefore, Liable To Be Quashed And/ Or Set Aside.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 271ASection 44DSection 5Section 92C

9(1)(i) of the Act to accrue or arise in India shall be only such part of the income as is reasonably attributable to the operations carried out in India. He submitted that in that view of the matter, without prejudice to the argument that the Assessee does not have PE in India, that sales commission is not attributable

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

GE PRECISION HEALTHCARE LLC,USA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2623/DEL/2023[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2024

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ravi Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234FSection 270ASection 56Section 9(1)(vii)

270A of the Act.” 3. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 3 GE Precision Healthcare LLC 4. GE Precision Healthcare LLC, is a company incorporated in the state of Delaware, USA. It carries on healthcare business for the General Electric group, and is a global medical device provider that designs, develops, manufactures

PRANAV VIKAS INDIA PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-19(1), DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1218/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

For Appellant: S/Shri K. Sampath, Advocate , R.KFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Dwivedi, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 270(9)Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35

property. The assessee had claimed the business loss of Rs. 3,28,29,990/-. After set-off loss, the assessee had admitted total loss of Rs. 2,50,29,113/-. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act and completed the assessment by disallowing difference

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

270A of the Act on account of alleged underreporting of income by way of misreporting. 11. That the above grounds of appeal are independent and without prejudice to one another. P a g e | 8 Booking.com B.V. (AY: 2018-19) 12. That the Appellant reserves its right to add, alter, amend and/or modify any ground of appeal before

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

BLACKLINE SYSTEMS, INC.,CALIFORNIA, UNITED STATES vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3798/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

housed on cloud and no customization in this regard is required to the Software. The Software, as a standard product, has inbuilt functionality to generate reports in varied formats. The functionality for the format, as desired by the client/customer is only enabled by the Company during implementation and there is no 9 Blackline Systems Inc. specific customization which is required

GURPREET SINGH DHILLON,INDIA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE INT TAX 1(2)(2), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3600/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2022-23] Gurpreet Singh Dhillon, Dcit, Kothi No. 2, Dear Baba Circle Int. Tax 1(2)(2), Jaimal Singh, Beas, Vs Civic Centre, Minto Road, Amritsar, New Delhi-110002. Punjab-143204 Pan- Afqpd5302R Assessee Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 23Section 270A

Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Circle 1(2)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. AO’) pertaining to A.Y. 2022-23. 2. Brief facts of the case: During the year the assessee had earned rental Income from leased out property

WE ARE VOICES ENTERTAINMENT INC,GURGAON vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 3(1)(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1474/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vizay Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 234ASection 270A

270A of the Act mechanically and without recording any adequate satisfaction for such initiation.” 3. Briefly stated, the assessee is a non-resident company incorporated under the laws of USA and is a tax resident of USA. The assessee is engaged in the business of branding and talent book agency services and inter alia acts as a mediator

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

9 “3. A perusal of the impugned assessment order would show that, variation has been made in the taxable income to the prejudice of the assessee. 3.1. The record shows that, the assessee had claimed exemptions under Section 11/12 of the Act, and thus, declared its income in the relevant AY i.e., 2018-2019, as ―Nil. 3.2. The Assessing Officer

SIMRAN BAGGA,DUBAI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE INT. TAXATION, 1(1)(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1786/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Anshul Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vizay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 54

section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). 1.3 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has erred in law in proposing to initiate penalty proceeding u/s 270A(9)(a) of the Act for under reporting of income in consequence to misreporting of income for 'misrepresentation or suppression