THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

property constructed by the assessee was let-out and rental income was received under the head ‘Income from House Property

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

property constructed by the assessee was let-out and rental income was received under the head ‘Income from House Property

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

house property so transferred; 21. This provision would not assist the Revenue to consider the assessee as the owner of the house

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B S YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI B.S. YEDDYURAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice Rathnakala

House and is considered to be the property of the House. No other authority has any right to pick up extracts

SHRI. NAVIN JOLLY vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

properties are not residential houses. It was also noted that by explanatory circular dated 30.06.1982, the word ‘residential house’ includes

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ANZ OPERATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD.,

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice N.K.Sudhindrarao R.F.A.No.1124/2011 C/W R.F.A.No.357/2011

property and item No.2 – residential house, the other properties are given goby, wherein when the particulars are given in the Will

M/S MAHESH INVESTMENTS vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: The Tribunal.

house property, as against the claim of the assessee that it should be assessed under the head ‘business income’. 3. It also