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.

15 results for “house property”+ Section 80P(2)(f)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai27Bangalore22Jaipur16Delhi16Hyderabad15Indore8Cochin8Chennai6Telangana5Surat5Chandigarh4Kerala3Varanasi3Pune3Visakhapatnam2Cuttack2Karnataka2Nagpur2SC1Kolkata1Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 153A28Section 143(3)15Section 13214Section 139(1)14Penalty14Search & Seizure14Section 80P4Section 142(1)3

THE INDUR INTIDEEPAM PRODUCERS MA CO-OP SOCIETIES FEDERATION LIMITED,NIZAMABAD vs. ITO WARD-1, NIZAMABAD

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

ITA 339/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramarao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Sr. A.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

80P of the Act provides as under : Deduction in respect of income of co-operative Societies. (1) Where, in the case of an assessee being a co-operative society, the gross total income includes any income referred to in sub- section (2), there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, the sums specified

ASR ENGINERING & PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED), ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1132/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

ASR ENGINERING & PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED), ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1133/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

ASR ENGINERING & PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED), ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1135/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

ASR ENGINERING & PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED), ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1136/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

DY. COMMSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3)., HYDERABAD vs. SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1382/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. ASR ENGINEERING AND PROJECTS LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 222/HYD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. ASR ENGINEERING AND PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 224/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. ASR ENGINEERING AND PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 226/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

ASR ENGINERING & PROJECTS LIMITED (FORMERLY SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED), ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1134/HYD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3)., HYDERABAD vs. SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1383/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3)., HYDERABAD vs. SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1384/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3)., HYDERABAD vs. SAI SUDHIR INFRASTRUCTURES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 1385/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. ASR ENGINEERING AND PROJECTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 223/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. ASR ENGINEERING AND PROJECTS LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, a) ITA Nos

ITA 225/HYD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansrl Appeal Number Pan A.Y. Appellant Respondent 1

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

f) of para 6, the learned CIT-DR mentions that the sub contractors did not maintain any books of account. In this regard, it is submitted firstly that this is not relating to the assessee. In so far as the assessee is concerned, it maintained books of account. The Assessing Officer has chosen to estimate the income at 12.5% rejecting