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.

10 results for “house property”+ Section 269Tclear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore18Mumbai13Delhi11Jaipur10Ahmedabad9Visakhapatnam9Hyderabad8Amritsar7Chennai5Surat5Lucknow3Chandigarh2Cuttack2Pune2Cochin1Indore1Jabalpur1Jodhpur1Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 271D16Section 269S10Section 153A8Addition to Income7Penalty6Section 694Section 143(3)4Section 1274Section 143(2)4Section 5

RAJENDRA MEENA,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the above appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1006/JPR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jan 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gogra, CA and Shri S.S. Gogra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT - DR
Section 271DSection 271ESection 5

269T was to curb the practice of introducing black money into books of account. The assessee had no intention to evade tax and did not make any attempt to make any liability. The individual had accepted loans from HUF for purchase of property in their individual names and had reasonable cause for accepting such loans. Therefore, the order

SH. PREM SINGH SAINI,SIKAR vs. ADDL. CIT, SIKAR, SIKAR

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

4
Business Income4
Unexplained Investment4
ITA 951/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 269SSection 271D

Housing Sikar Board, Shivsingpura Sikar, Sikar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BIAPS 9302 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 28/08/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date

SH. PREM SINGH SAINI,SIKAR vs. ADDL. CIT, SIKAR, SIKAR

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

ITA 952/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 269SSection 271D

Housing Sikar Board, Shivsingpura Sikar, Sikar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BIAPS 9302 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 28/08/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date

SH. ASHOK KUMAR PORWAL,JHALAWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 572/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 269SSection 271D

269T of the Act. Therefore, 14 Sh. Ashok Kumar Porwal vs. JCIT once it is not a loan taken by the assessee for his requirement but the explanation was accepted by the Assessing Officer that this amount was deposited by Shri Shreeram for his requirement of participating in the tender of the liquor shops then in absence of any fresh

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 496/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

section 269SS and 269T of the Act by the loanee (who received advance from appellant). The learned AO is directed to examine the 10 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal same from the perspective of penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Act and make a reference to the Jt. Commissioner/Addl. Commissioner. In the result this

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 500/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

section 269SS and 269T of the Act by the loanee (who received advance from appellant). The learned AO is directed to examine the 10 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal same from the perspective of penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Act and make a reference to the Jt. Commissioner/Addl. Commissioner. In the result this

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 497/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आंकड़ुठरधारी आइटीएए सं.र@ITA Nos.493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 Mahendra Kumar Goyal चुके Vs. ACIT/DCIT Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Central Circle-03, Jaipur लेखा संख्याल्लेय सं.जीआइआर सं.पान@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G अपीलार्थी@Appellant प्रत्यार्थी@Respondent निर्धारीती की आर से@ Assessee by : Shri P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की आर से@ R

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

section 269SS and 269T of the Act by the loanee (who received advance from appellant). The learned AO is directed to examine the 10 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal same from the perspective of penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Act and make a reference to the Jt. Commissioner/Addl. Commissioner. In the result this

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

ITA 493/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

section 269SS and 269T of the Act by the loanee (who received advance from appellant). The learned AO is directed to examine the 10 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal same from the perspective of penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Act and make a reference to the Jt. Commissioner/Addl. Commissioner. In the result this

JITENDRA MEENA,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 816/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jan 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gogra, CA and Shri S.S. Gogra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT - DR
Section 271DSection 5

269T was to curb the practice of introducing black money into books of account. The assessee had no intention to evade tax and did not make any attempt to make any liability. The individual had accepted loans from HUF for purchase of property in their individual names and had reasonable cause for accepting such loans. Therefore, the order

MUKESH KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 321/JPR/2021[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jul 2022AY 2010-2011
For Appellant: Shri G.M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 151Section 271E

house on that address. 5 MUKESH KUMAR AGARWAL VS ITO WARD 1(2), JAIPUR The AO looking to overall facts of the case and the discussion made with the assessee found the assessee liable to pay long term capital gain on sale of property in question by calculating as under:- Sale Consideration Rs.8,87,220/- Indexed cost of acquisition Rs.8