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.

510 results for “house property”+ House Propertyclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,410Delhi2,051Chennai589Bangalore577Jaipur562Hyderabad510Ahmedabad377Pune373Kolkata292Chandigarh289Cochin218Indore211Visakhapatnam124Surat120Rajkot118Raipur104Nagpur103Amritsar96Lucknow90Patna83Agra72Cuttack51Jodhpur50Guwahati36Dehradun24Allahabad18Jabalpur17Ranchi15Varanasi12Panaji11

Key Topics

Section 13287Addition to Income72Search & Seizure56Section 153A39Section 6935Section 139(1)30Section 153C29Section 69B27Section 143(3)

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HYDERABAD vs. NARASIMHA REDDY DUTHALA, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1113/HYD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 May 2025AY 2022-23
For Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 54Section 54F

house properties are discussed below.\n6.16.2.\nIn respect of the residential House Property at\nPlot No. 7, Gayatri

ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, HYDERABAD vs. KESAVA KUMAR KUNAPUREDDY, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 937/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Showing 1–20 of 510 · Page 1 of 26

...
24
Disallowance23
House Property18
Cash Deposit16
Section 139(1)Section 54ESection 54F

house property or for purchase of house property, in our considered view, the assessee satisfies the conditions

SATYA SAYEE BABU DIVI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assesses is partly allowed

ITA 1268/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1268/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2022-23) Satya Sayee Babu Divi, Vs. Acit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Ayeps7457B Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri Amrit Kumar Kota, Ca राज" व "वारा/Revenue By:: Ms. Payal Gupta, Sr.Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 09/02/2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Pronouncement: 13/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Shri Satya Sayee Babu Divi, (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 25/06/2025 For The Assessment Year (“A.Y.”) 2022-23. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Amrit Kumar Kota, CAFor Respondent: : Ms. Payal Gupta, Sr.AR
Section 143(2)

property under Schedule House Property, the same is being treated as house property and deemed

AVNISH KUMAR,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 919/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. G. Saratha, SR-DR

house property and sold house property are one and the same even though the schedule clearly

SURENDRA BABU SABBINENI,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 326/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Advocate Kotha Hari PrasadFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar CIT(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54F

House Property is conclusive of the house property being residential and not commercial and that exemption

SRIDHAR REDDY BAYAPU,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 841/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us:

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

house property, constructed a residential house to be eligible for exemption U/s. 54 or the capital gains

RACHIT V SHAH,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-7(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 420/HYD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya for Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 54F

house property in his return of income. In respect of the third property, the assessee claimed it is a commercial

BOLLINENI KRISHNA KUMARI ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 302/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 50CSection 54Section 54F

house property from two houses. The details of two houses are as under: The details of which

JOSEPH KIRAN KUMAR REDDY BASANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 694/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Chary Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2015-16 Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Joseph Kiran Kumar Reddy Income Tax, Basani, Circle 5(1), C/O. Pary & Co., Chartered Hyderabad. Accountants, No.6, 2Nd Floor, 8-2-703/Vj/6, Vijay Villa, Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad – 500034, Telangana. Pan : Agcpb8082B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vamsi Krishna Reddy, C.A. Revenue By: Shri Karthik Manickam, Sr.Ar. Date Of Hearing: 29.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Vamsi Krishna Reddy, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Karthik Manickam, Sr.AR
Section 54Section 54FSection 54F(1)Section 54F(3)

house property and reinvestment of sale consideration 8 for purchase of another residential house property. As per the said

GOWRI SHANKAR GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 514/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sashank Dundu, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.Praveen, DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 294Section 69A

house property as was declared in the return of income; and (ii) that there were large value of cash

HYDERABAD INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1856/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana &For Respondent: Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

properties known as “Chennai House” and “Firhavin Estate” both in Chennai and to let out those properties

GONUGUNTLA NIRMALA DEVI,ANANTAPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 455/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 68

property at Rs.66,36,216/-, by taking gross income from house property at Rs1,11,61,147/- and net income

HIGHEND PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all these appeals are accordingly allowed in part

ITA 2287/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent / Ita Nos. / A.Y. Deputy Commissioner 2284/Hyd/2018 2011-12 Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad Income Tax Officer, 2285/Hyd/2018 2012-13 Ward-2(3), M/S. Highend Hyderabad Properties Pvt. Ltd., Assistant Hyderabad Commissioner Of [Pan: Aabch7130G] 2286/Hyd/2018 2013-14 Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad Deputy Commissioner 2287/Hyd/2018 2014-15 Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/02/2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 29/03/2023 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, Jm: Aggrieved By The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Guntur & Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), In The Case Of M/S. Highend Properties Pvt. Ltd., (“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15, Assessees Preferred These

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

property yielding house property income and, therefore, the rest of the interest cannot be allowed. 7. Hence

HIGHEND PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all these appeals are accordingly allowed in part

ITA 2285/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent / Ita Nos. / A.Y. Deputy Commissioner 2284/Hyd/2018 2011-12 Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad Income Tax Officer, 2285/Hyd/2018 2012-13 Ward-2(3), M/S. Highend Hyderabad Properties Pvt. Ltd., Assistant Hyderabad Commissioner Of [Pan: Aabch7130G] 2286/Hyd/2018 2013-14 Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad Deputy Commissioner 2287/Hyd/2018 2014-15 Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/02/2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 29/03/2023 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, Jm: Aggrieved By The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Guntur & Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), In The Case Of M/S. Highend Properties Pvt. Ltd., (“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15, Assessees Preferred These

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

property yielding house property income and, therefore, the rest of the interest cannot be allowed. 7. Hence

HIGHEND PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all these appeals are accordingly allowed in part

ITA 2286/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent / Ita Nos. / A.Y. Deputy Commissioner 2284/Hyd/2018 2011-12 Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad Income Tax Officer, 2285/Hyd/2018 2012-13 Ward-2(3), M/S. Highend Hyderabad Properties Pvt. Ltd., Assistant Hyderabad Commissioner Of [Pan: Aabch7130G] 2286/Hyd/2018 2013-14 Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad Deputy Commissioner 2287/Hyd/2018 2014-15 Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/02/2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 29/03/2023 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, Jm: Aggrieved By The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Guntur & Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), In The Case Of M/S. Highend Properties Pvt. Ltd., (“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15, Assessees Preferred These

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

property yielding house property income and, therefore, the rest of the interest cannot be allowed. 7. Hence

HIGHEND PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, all these appeals are accordingly allowed in part

ITA 2284/HYD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं निर्धारण वर्ा अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent / Ita Nos. / A.Y. Deputy Commissioner 2284/Hyd/2018 2011-12 Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad Income Tax Officer, 2285/Hyd/2018 2012-13 Ward-2(3), M/S. Highend Hyderabad Properties Pvt. Ltd., Assistant Hyderabad Commissioner Of [Pan: Aabch7130G] 2286/Hyd/2018 2013-14 Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad Deputy Commissioner 2287/Hyd/2018 2014-15 Of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/02/2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 29/03/2023 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, Jm: Aggrieved By The Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Guntur & Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), In The Case Of M/S. Highend Properties Pvt. Ltd., (“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15, Assessees Preferred These

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

property yielding house property income and, therefore, the rest of the interest cannot be allowed. 7. Hence

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. MALAYADRI LAXMI NARASIMHAM MULLAPATI, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1082/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Sri Mohd. AfzalFor Respondent: Sri Kumar Aditya
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 54Section 54F

property No. 916, Road No. 46, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad and that the construction of house property was completed

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. SANJAY CHOWDARY GADDIPATI, HYDERABAD

ITA 376/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 54FSection 54F(4)

house property\".]\nExplanation. -For the purposes of this section,-\n66\n[***]\n67\n[***]\n\"net consideration\"68, in relation

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1), HYDERABAD vs. INDIRA VENGALA, HYDERABAD

ITA 587/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha G.Assessment Year – 2018-19 Income Tax Officer, Late Indira Vengala, Hyderabad. Ward 6(1), Hyderabad. Represented By Legal Heir Vengala Sanjeev Kumar, Hyderabad. Pan : Bbopv2537D (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No.10/Hyd/2024 Arising Out Of Ita No.587/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year – 2018-19 Late Indira Vengala, Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward6(1), Hyderabad. Represented By Legal Heir Vengala Sanjeev Kumar, Hyderabad. Pan : Bbopv2537D (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Pavan Kumar Gorti, Ca. Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.A.R. Date Of Hearing: 23.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.09.2024

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Kumar Gorti, CAFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.A.R
Section 147Section 54(1)

house property during the year under consideration. The assessee sold immovable property i.e., house property

MADHUSUDHAN JAJU,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SANGAREDDY

In the result, the C.O. of the Revenue is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 442/HYD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Jan 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: : Shri SPG Mudaliar, SR-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 54F

house properties. Now it is a matter of\nverification, whether both the properties are residential or not.\nTherefore