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.

457 results for “house property”+ Section 282clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka457Mumbai354Delhi331Bangalore180Chandigarh66Jaipur65Chennai53Kolkata45Hyderabad42Ahmedabad31Indore22Rajkot21Calcutta16Pune14Telangana11Agra10Amritsar10Raipur8Surat6Jodhpur4Cuttack4Nagpur4Patna4Rajasthan4SC3Visakhapatnam3Kerala2Cochin2Guwahati1Andhra Pradesh1Lucknow1

Key Topics

Addition to Income49Section 54F5Section 174Section 2634Section 1482

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SMT HEMA KRISHNAMURTHY

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/25/2016HC Karnataka01 Mar 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,ASHOK S.KINAGI

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 54F

house property by virtue of Section 22 of the Act and the same was shown in the return. The tribunal has rightly held that the Commissioner of Income Tax could not have invoked the powers under Section 263 of the Act in the fact situation of the case. It is also pointed out that the appeal of the revenue

Showing 1–20 of 457 · Page 1 of 23

...

M/S MYPOL POLYMERS TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

COP/25/2016HC Karnataka15 Sept 2016

Bench: L.NARAYANA SWAMY

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 54F

house property by virtue of Section 22 of the Act and the same was shown in the return. The tribunal has rightly held that the Commissioner of Income Tax could not have invoked the powers under Section 263 of the Act in the fact situation of the case. It is also pointed out that the appeal of the revenue

SRI VIDYA MANOHARA TEERTHA SWAMIGALU vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/17370/2012HC Karnataka02 Jan 2013

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Dilip B Bhosale

house situated in G.K. Temple street, Bangalore measuring 15 x 30 sq. ft. has been mortgaged for a 11 period of 5 years for Rs.75,000/- on 15.12.2006 by entering into an agreement. 4. The GPA entered in August 2010 for the sale of land measuring 559.29 acres situated in Survey No.1 in Pattemvenlapalli of Chittur district of Andhrapradesh

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GOURAWWA B GORNAL

The appeal is dismissed

RP/100148/2014HC Karnataka27 Feb 2015

Bench: A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA

Section 96

Section 114(g) of the Indian Evidence Act. But, in a very highly irregular and impermissible manner, the learned Civil Court has held that the plaintiff should have produced such Will. 34 26. Sri Ashok Haranahalli, the learned Senior Counsel for the defendants, refuted the canvas by the learned counsel for the plaintiff with the following submissions. It is settled

MR. N. LAKSHAMANA RAO PESHVE vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

Accordingly, they are dismissed

WP/24366/2016HC Karnataka18 Dec 2020

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice John Michael Cunha

Section 13(2)Section 5Section 5(1)

282, while deciding the constitutional validity of some of the provisions of the PML Act 2002 and has held thus:- “Money laundering is a stand alone offence. A person who has not committed a scheduled offence could be prosecuted for an offence of money laundering. In such a situation, the prosecution need not wait for the scheduled offence

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. INDIA HERITAGE FOUNDATION

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/382/2012HC Karnataka18 Aug 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 80I

property held for charitable purposes. The Tribunal, therefore, set aside the order passed under Section 263 of the Act and allowed the appeal preferred by the assessee. Being aggrieved, the revenue has filed this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the Tribunal itself in paragraph 21 of the order had recorded the finding that invocation of Section

PASCHIM VIBHAG SHIKSHAN MANDAL BIJAGARI vs. THE COMMISSIONER and APPELLATE AUTHORITY

WP/101436/2018HC Karnataka01 Dec 2021

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Suraj Govindaraj Writ Petition No.101436/2018 (S-Pro) C/W. Writ Petition No.77680/2013 (Gm-Ksr), Writ Petition No.81667/2013 (Gm-R/C) & Writ Petition No.101972/2017 (Gm-R/C)

282] and Ratilal Panachand Gandhi & Ors. v. State of Bombay & Ors. [AIR 1954 SC 388]. 7.12. By relying upon the above and by referring to Section 2 of the Act of 1920 he submits that it is : 38 : the District Court which would have the jurisdiction insofar as the Trust is concerned, and therefore, the proceedings for direction

K R SATYANARAYANA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the orders passed by the Commissioner of

ITA/192/2015HC Karnataka21 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(2)Section 154Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 50CSection 80C

house property for a sum of Rs.2,03,986/- and capital gains at Rs.19,06,984/- and declared income from other sources at Rs.1,55,438/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 30.08.2010. The Assessing Officer by an order dated 15.12.2011 after making enquiries

SRI CHITURI DURGA RAO vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/41507/2017HC Karnataka13 Dec 2017

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice G. Narendar Writ Petition No.41506/2017 (Apmc) C/W Writ Petition No.41507/2017 (Apmc)

Section 17

282, Gangavathi Taluk, Koppal District . ... Respondents (By Sri. A.G. Shivanna, AAG for R1 & R2; A/w Sri Mahendra AGA, Sri. S.S. Mallikarjun C. Basareddy, Advocate for R3, Sri. Y. Laxmi Narayana, Advocate for Sri. Diwakara, K., Advocate for C/R4) 4 This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned order

NIRMALA BAGODI vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/41506/2017HC Karnataka13 Dec 2017

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice G. Narendar Writ Petition No.41506/2017 (Apmc) C/W Writ Petition No.41507/2017 (Apmc)

Section 17

282, Gangavathi Taluk, Koppal District . ... Respondents (By Sri. A.G. Shivanna, AAG for R1 & R2; A/w Sri Mahendra AGA, Sri. S.S. Mallikarjun C. Basareddy, Advocate for R3, Sri. Y. Laxmi Narayana, Advocate for Sri. Diwakara, K., Advocate for C/R4) 4 This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned order

SMT. M R PRABHAVATHY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WTA/1/2019HC Karnataka04 Mar 2020

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice K.Natarajan Election Petition No.1 Of 2019 Connected With Election Petition No.2 Of 2019

Section 81

Section 33A of RP Act and 106 he has committed corrupt practice of bribery as contemplated under Sections 123(1)(A), 123(1)(B), 123(7), 123(7)(b), 123(vii)(d), 123(7)(h) and Section 123(8), 123(3), 3A and 123(6) of R.P. Act ? The petitioner in E.P. No.2/2019 has contended that respondent No.1 committed corrupt

DR M RAVINDRA VARMA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/8540/2020HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

HOUSE NO.1, VARS FERNDALE APARTMENTS 1ST MAIN, KODIHALLI HAL 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 008. 2. M/S SUBHODAYARAGA INFRA PVT LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.144, 12TH MAIN, 23RD CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. DR. KRISHNA T V REDDY AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE T.V.CHALAMA REDDY R/AT NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, WINDSOR CASTLE NO.50/1, PALACE ROAD

L & T CONSTRUCTIONS EQUIPMENT vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/28692/2018HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

HOUSE NO.1, VARS FERNDALE APARTMENTS 1ST MAIN, KODIHALLI HAL 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 008. 2. M/S SUBHODAYARAGA INFRA PVT LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.144, 12TH MAIN, 23RD CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. DR. KRISHNA T V REDDY AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE T.V.CHALAMA REDDY R/AT NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, WINDSOR CASTLE NO.50/1, PALACE ROAD

M/S SOBHA LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/28992/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

HOUSE NO.1, VARS FERNDALE APARTMENTS 1ST MAIN, KODIHALLI HAL 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 008. 2. M/S SUBHODAYARAGA INFRA PVT LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.144, 12TH MAIN, 23RD CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. DR. KRISHNA T V REDDY AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE T.V.CHALAMA REDDY R/AT NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, WINDSOR CASTLE NO.50/1, PALACE ROAD

SMT. H G SHEELA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/12535/2016HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

HOUSE NO.1, VARS FERNDALE APARTMENTS 1ST MAIN, KODIHALLI HAL 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 008. 2. M/S SUBHODAYARAGA INFRA PVT LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.144, 12TH MAIN, 23RD CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. DR. KRISHNA T V REDDY AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE T.V.CHALAMA REDDY R/AT NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, WINDSOR CASTLE NO.50/1, PALACE ROAD

M/S DSR INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/22621/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

HOUSE NO.1, VARS FERNDALE APARTMENTS 1ST MAIN, KODIHALLI HAL 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 008. 2. M/S SUBHODAYARAGA INFRA PVT LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.144, 12TH MAIN, 23RD CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. DR. KRISHNA T V REDDY AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE T.V.CHALAMA REDDY R/AT NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, WINDSOR CASTLE NO.50/1, PALACE ROAD

SRI C THIMMA REDDY vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/34265/2018HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

HOUSE NO.1, VARS FERNDALE APARTMENTS 1ST MAIN, KODIHALLI HAL 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 008. 2. M/S SUBHODAYARAGA INFRA PVT LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.144, 12TH MAIN, 23RD CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. DR. KRISHNA T V REDDY AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE T.V.CHALAMA REDDY R/AT NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, WINDSOR CASTLE NO.50/1, PALACE ROAD

SRI KRISHANAMA RAJU vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/59/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

HOUSE NO.1, VARS FERNDALE APARTMENTS 1ST MAIN, KODIHALLI HAL 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 008. 2. M/S SUBHODAYARAGA INFRA PVT LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.144, 12TH MAIN, 23RD CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. DR. KRISHNA T V REDDY AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE T.V.CHALAMA REDDY R/AT NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, WINDSOR CASTLE NO.50/1, PALACE ROAD

SRI M MUNISWAMY vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/30168/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

HOUSE NO.1, VARS FERNDALE APARTMENTS 1ST MAIN, KODIHALLI HAL 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 008. 2. M/S SUBHODAYARAGA INFRA PVT LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.144, 12TH MAIN, 23RD CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. DR. KRISHNA T V REDDY AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE T.V.CHALAMA REDDY R/AT NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, WINDSOR CASTLE NO.50/1, PALACE ROAD

SRI. SHIVALINGAIAH vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/52084/2019HC Karnataka04 Aug 2021

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

HOUSE NO.1, VARS FERNDALE APARTMENTS 1ST MAIN, KODIHALLI HAL 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 008. 2. M/S SUBHODAYARAGA INFRA PVT LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.144, 12TH MAIN, 23RD CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011. 3. DR. KRISHNA T V REDDY AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE T.V.CHALAMA REDDY R/AT NO.501, 6TH FLOOR, WINDSOR CASTLE NO.50/1, PALACE ROAD