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.

17 results for “house property”+ Section 112clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi333Mumbai220Bangalore145Jaipur114Chandigarh99Hyderabad64Cochin63Chennai41Raipur35Indore20Ahmedabad19SC18Kolkata17Patna16Agra16Rajkot15Pune13Cuttack10Visakhapatnam7Jodhpur7Lucknow6Surat6Guwahati5Amritsar3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Nagpur2ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1

Key Topics

Section 26315Section 143(3)10Addition to Income9Section 115J7Condonation of Delay7Limitation/Time-bar6Section 2505Section 685Undisclosed Income

KOOMBER PROPERTIES & LEASING CO. PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CPA. BANGALORE. , BANGALORE.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in the above terms

ITA 1250/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 250

House” 14, Gurusaday Road, Kolkata-700019 Telephone: 2287-3067/8737/1816 Fax No.: (033) 2287-2577/7089 KPLC/IT/2018-19 August 24, 2023 The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-l Coimbatore Dear Sir, PAN: AABCK3342D ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 DIN: ITBA/APL/F/APL 1/2023-24/1055203146(1), DATED 17/08/2023 2 Koomber Properties & Leasing Co. Pvt. Ltd. APPEAL NO, CIT(A), Kolkata-4/10179/2019-20 This has reference

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

5
Section 1474
Section 41(1)4
Section 133(6)4
ITA 462/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: Disposed
ITAT Kolkata
06 Mar 2024
AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35(1)(i)Section 43BSection 56(2)(x)Section 80J

Housing Projects Limited reported in 343 ITR 349 and DIT –vs.- Jyoti Foundation reported in 357 ITR 488. f) The fifth proposition of the ld. A.R. is with regard to the fact that the values adopted by the stamp duty authorities were highly excessive and did not reflect the true and correct market reality. The ld. A.R. submitted that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AXIS OVERSEAS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2425/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc 1(1), Kolkata Axis Overseas Limited Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, 21A, Shakespeare Sarani, Vs. 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700107, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca7497L Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

112 taxmann.com 322 (SC) has held that disallowances u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income of relevant year. The appellant has stated that since the assessee company has earned exempt income to the tune of Rs. 8,774/- in the relevant year. Therefore, the addition made on account of disallowances u/s 14A is to be restricted

M/S. SHIMMER TEXTILES PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WD-12(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 773/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254Section 41(1)

house property and income of Rs. 31,11,681/- declared in the return for AY 2011- 12 furnished on 22.09.211. Assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 26.03.2014 assessing income at Rs. 57,25,440/-. Thereafter the additions made in the assessment order were challenged by the assessee to the higher appellate forum and vide order dated

GARUD CREDIT & HOLDING PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O WD - 9(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1270/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1270/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Garud Credit & Holding Pvt. Limited,.........Appellant D.J. Shah & Co., 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Aaacg9791P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-9(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 35DSection 68

House International Pvt. Ltd., ITA Nos. 112, 111 and 110/2018, dated 07.08.2018 (2018) 408 ITR 561 (MP), against which the SLP filed by the Revenue has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 31. Further we find that issuance of notice under section 133(6) of the Act tantamounts to be a sufficient enquiry as held

VIJAY SHANKAR PANDEY,KOLKATA vs. WARD 33(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 695/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No. 695/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Vijay Shankar Pandey,………………..………Appellant 4/7A, Commerce House, 2, Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkata-700013 [Pan:Afspp7040Q] -Vs.- Assessing Officer,……………….…..….…....Respondent Ward-33(2), Kolkata, 10 Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Appearances By: Ms. Sarita Chobey, C.A., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 24, 2025 O R D E R

Section 56(2)(vii)

property as per Stamp Duty Authority from the consideration amount shall not be chargeable to Income tax under the head ‘Income from Other Sources’ under the provision of section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on or before 19.11.2018. However, the assessee did not file any explanation in this regard till date. In absence

JYOTI JHA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT (IT), CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 225/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 225/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jyoti Jha Acit(It), Circle-2(1), Kolkata Kalani & Co. Chartered Accountants Vs 5Th Floor, Milestone Building Gandhinagar Turn Tonk Road Jaipur - 302015 [Pan : Aezpj7440J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal, Fca Revenue By : Shri Sunil Kr. Agarwala, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/08/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/10/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Directions Of The Dispute Resolution Panel – 2, New Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Drp”) Dt. 05/12/2022, Passed U/S 144C(5) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. The Ld. Ao Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Assessing The Income Under The Head Capital Gain At Rs.41,46,0917- As Against Nil Income Declared By The Assessee On The Basis Of Direction Of Drp Ignoring That The Amount Of Capital Gain Has Been Invested In Purchase Of Flat Before The Time Available For Filing The Return U/S 139 & Thus Eligible For Deduction U/S 54 Of The Act Even If The Sale Deed Was Executed Subsequently. He Has Further Erred In Observing That Assessee Has Failed To Produce Documentary Evidence In Support Of Claim Ignoring That The Same Was Filed Before The Drp. 2. The Ld. Ao Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Making Addition Of Rs. 7,41,700/- In Respect Of Cash Deposit In The Bank Account U/S 68 Of The Act As Per The Direction Of Drp. He Has Further Erred In Holding That Assessee Failed To Produce Documentary Evidence In Support Of Averments In The Affidavit.

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kr. Agarwala, CIT, D/R
Section 139Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 194Section 54Section 68Section 69

Section 194) On various dates Rs.70,00,000/- 2. Deposited cash of Rs. 10,00,000 or On various dates Rs.14,04,700/- more in a saving bank account 3. Deposit in Cash aggregating On various dates Rs.5,00,000/- Rs.2,00,00/- or more, with a Banking company 4. Purchase of immovable property On various dates Rs.1

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1697/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
Section 115J

112 and letter from Rungta\nProjects stating payment not done until 02.09.2011 was claimed to be\nfiled. Further, in respect of Tikak Colliery, the payment was not finalized\ndue to litigation filed by Rungta Projects in the concerned year. In P &\nL account, the expenses are debited under Contractual Expenses in the\nnature of Transportation Expenses. Since the addition

D.C.I.T,CIRCLE-9(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S APOLLO GLENEAGLES HOSPITAL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for AY 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 1639/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Vandana Bhandari, FCA and Shri SaibalFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukuga Sema, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

house for themselves and hence, the value of the aforesaid services in comparable uncontrolled transactions could not be 'Nil'. Such a view has also been confirmed and endorsed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Kolkata Tribunal in the case of N LC Nalco India Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Circle 10, Kolkata [2016] 71 taxmann.com57 (Kolkata - Trib

D.C.I.T,CIRCLE-9(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S APOLLO GLENEAGLES HOSPITAL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for AY 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 1501/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Vandana Bhandari, FCA and Shri SaibalFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukuga Sema, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

house for themselves and hence, the value of the aforesaid services in comparable uncontrolled transactions could not be 'Nil'. Such a view has also been confirmed and endorsed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Kolkata Tribunal in the case of N LC Nalco India Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Circle 10, Kolkata [2016] 71 taxmann.com57 (Kolkata - Trib

MAITHAN CERAMIC LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 7(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1944/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jan 2026AY 2011-2012
For Appellant: Shri P.K.Himmatsinghka, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Lakra, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)

Properties Pvt Ltd\n30.06.2010\n5,000,000\nChq\nNo\n10,675,616\n5,000,00\n1.R.N.Mkukherjee, 5th Floor\n02.07.2010\n5,000,000\nChq\n750,685\n75,069\n10,000,00\nKolkata-700 001\n31.03.2011\n10,675,61\nPA No. AACCA 2514J\nHarvard Trading Pvt Ltd\n22.06.2010\n4,000,000\nRTGS\nNo\n4,279,123\n4,000,00\n1,R.N.Mkukherjee

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

ITA 623/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 250

112 and letter from Rungta Projects stating payment not done until 02.09.2011 was claimed to be filed. Further, in respect of Tikak Colliery, the payment was not finalized due to litigation filed by Rungta Projects in the concerned year. In P & L account, the expenses are debited under Contractual Expenses in the nature of Transportation Expenses. Since the addition

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 622/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2011-12
Section 115J

112 and letter from Rungta\nProjects stating payment not done until 02.09.2011 was claimed to be\nfiled. Further, in respect of Tikak Colliery, the payment was not finalized\ndue to litigation filed by Rungta Projects in the concerned year. In P &\nL account, the expenses are debited under Contractual Expenses in the\nnature of Transportation Expenses. Since the addition

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1696/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
Section 115J

112 and letter from Rungta\nProjects stating payment not done until 02.09.2011 was claimed to be\nfiled. Further, in respect of Tikak Colliery, the payment was not finalized\ndue to litigation filed by Rungta Projects in the concerned year. In P &\nL account, the expenses are debited under Contractual Expenses in the\nnature of Transportation Expenses. Since the addition

COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 467/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115J

112 and letter from Rungta\nProjects stating payment not done until 02.09.2011 was claimed to be\nfiled. Further, in respect of Tikak Colliery, the payment was not finalized\ndue to litigation filed by Rungta Projects in the concerned year. In P &\nL account, the expenses are debited under Contractual Expenses in the\nnature of Transportation Expenses. Since the addition

M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

ITA 1406/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
Section 115J

112 and letter from Rungta\nProjects stating payment not done until 02.09.2011 was claimed to be\nfiled. Further, in respect of Tikak Colliery, the payment was not finalized\ndue to litigation filed by Rungta Projects in the concerned year. In P &\nL account, the expenses are debited under Contractual Expenses in the\nnature of Transportation Expenses. Since the addition

NAVANSH VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 724/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

properties, obligation and securities. The company also carries on Software business as manufacturer, buyer, seller, trader, importer, exporter, distributor, broker, stockiest, and omission agent. The company was incorporated as a private company in 1976, promoted by Giriraj Kishor Agarwal and Tunu Agarwal. Other key persons are Hemant Kumar Tibrewala, Shardadevi Tibrewala, Kamalkant Tibrewala Financials of the company for the past