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.

13 results for “house property”+ Section 234Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai378Delhi349Bangalore168Jaipur68Ahmedabad52Chennai22Agra18Hyderabad15Kolkata13Indore13Pune13Lucknow10Visakhapatnam8Surat8Nagpur8Patna6Jodhpur5Chandigarh4Ranchi3Rajkot1SC1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)10Section 234B8Addition to Income8Section 2507Section 247House Property7Section 143(1)6Section 92C5Section 234Section 263

SUGAM REALTY LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, KOLKATA

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

ITA 381/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(4)Section 234BSection 250Section 270A

House Property as per the provisions of Section 23(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Ld. CIT(A), Income Tax Department, NFAC erred in law as well in facts in confirming the said addition in as much as in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, no such Addition was at all called

4
Deduction4
Disallowance4

SMT. PRIYANKA GANGULY,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.(IT)-CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2619/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

Section 143(3)Section 23Section 234BSection 234DSection 24Section 250

property income up to 50% under section 24 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) ii. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), Circle - 2(1), Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the DCIT) in restricting the claim of home loan interest deduction under section

HIND CERAMICS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 610/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury &For Respondent: Shri Huidrom Robindro Singh, DR
Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 24(1)

house property and delete the addition made to the total income. The ground no. 2,3 and 4 are allowed. 07. The issue raised in ground no.6, is against the charging of interest u/s 234B of the Act which are consequential and are not required to be adjudicated at this stage. ITA No.610/KOL/2024 for A.Y. 2017-18 08. The counsel

HIND CERAMICS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 608/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury &For Respondent: Shri Huidrom Robindro Singh, DR
Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 24(1)

house property and delete the addition made to the total income. The ground no. 2,3 and 4 are allowed. 07. The issue raised in ground no.6, is against the charging of interest u/s 234B of the Act which are consequential and are not required to be adjudicated at this stage. ITA No.610/KOL/2024 for A.Y. 2017-18 08. The counsel

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

234B in the sum of Rs.279104 and Section 234C in the sum of Rs.93408. (4) That the appellant craves leave to add, alter modify the grounds mentioned herein above. - 4 Koomber Properties & Leasing Co. Pvt. Ltd. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 are related to the addition of Rs.60,46,000/- to the appellant’s income from business

MOHD. ZULKARNAIN ALI,DURGAPUR vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

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

ITA 449/KOL/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Mohd. Zulkarnain Ali Ito, Ward-1(1), Durgapur 98, Ramanujam Road, B-Zone, Vs. Durgapur-713205. Pan: Ahspa 0354 N (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 31.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 148Section 194Section 234ASection 234BSection 44A

House Property Income as per 26AS report on estimated basis which is completely arbitrary, unjustified and illegal. 4. that on the facts of the case, the A.0. was wrong in not considering the facts that the assessee carrying on business as electrical equipment and light renting and should be deducted @2% on Rent of plant & machinery as per section

M/S. TEGA INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1875/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(5)Section 92BSection 92CSection 92C(3)

234B of the Act to the tune of Rs. 47,617. Prayer i. That the Appellant craves leave to add to and/or amend, alter, modify or rescind the grounds of appeal stated herein above before or at any time of hearing of the appeal. ii. The Appellant submits that the above grounds are independent and without prejudice to one another

NEETU AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 7(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 67/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Puja Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Abhishek Kumar, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 250Section 90

section 250 of the Income Tax Act. 1961 ('the Act') which is bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2 Dismissing the appeal without providing an opportunity of being heard and thus the order is violative of principles of natural justice and unsustainable in law. 2 Neetu Agarwal AY: 2020-21 3. Holding that the delay in filing

DURGAPUR SOCIETY OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, CIR-2, EXEMPT, KOL. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 498/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 498/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Durgapur Society Of Management Income Tax Officer, Circle-2, Science Vs Exempt, Kolkata Dr. Zakir Hussain Avenue Hudco More Bidhannager Durgapur - 713206 [Pan : Aaatd7804P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/09/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(E)”) Dt. 21/03/2023, Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Ld Pcit Erred In Setting Aside The Order In The Light Of The Judgement Of The Hon'Ble Apex Court In The Case Of New Noble Educational Society Pronounced On 19Th Oct, 2022 When The Judgement Itself Clearly Stated That It Should Be Applied Prospectively & Therefore The Order Of The Pcit Should Be Quashed Since The Order Passed By The Ao Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interests Of Revenue. 2. For That The Ld Pcit Erred In Holding That The Rent Received From The Building Which Was Let Out Since Lying Idle For Some Period Constituted Income From Business When The Objects The Predominant Object Of The Society Was Providing Education & 2

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R
Section 10Section 11(5)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

House Property. 6. For that even otherwise the income could be computed separately since the rental income was separately ascertainable. 7. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Ld PCIT is liable to be set aside.” 3. Thought the assessee has raised various grounds of appeal, the sole grievance of the assessee

NORMURA RESEARCH INSTITURE FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-2(2), KOL, KOLKATA

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

ITA 204/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Amal Kamat, CIT, DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)

234B and 234C of the Act which are consequential in nature and do not need any specific adjudication. 4. Now coming to the major issue for our consideration which is in respect of inclusion and exclusion of certain comparables for the purpose of determining ALP of international transactions entered into by the assessee with its AEs. We take up ground

VAIBHAV DAS MUNDHRA,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 35/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Dec 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 295(1)Section 90

house properties situated in India and Income from Capital gains and income from other sources. The appellant had earned the following income from outside India (Singapore) which was subject to tax in both India and Singapore: Salary income from Singapore during AY 2021-22, total foreign source income taxed in India of Rs. 99,84,781/- for salary earned

M/S. TDK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EPCOS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),NADIA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2015-16, is allowed

ITA 2646/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

234B of the Act. 19. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO has grossly erred and unjustified in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 20. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. TPO/ AO has not considered the benefit of variation / deduction

M/S. TDK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EPCOS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),NADIA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 11(1) , KOLKATA

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2015-16, is allowed

ITA 1998/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

234B of the Act. 19. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO has grossly erred and unjustified in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 20. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. TPO/ AO has not considered the benefit of variation / deduction