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.

241 results for “house property”+ Section 249clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai241Delhi201Chandigarh54Jaipur54Bangalore51Amritsar34Pune20Indore14Raipur14Chennai14Ahmedabad12Hyderabad11Cochin10Visakhapatnam7Patna7Rajkot6Kolkata6SC4Surat2Lucknow2Nagpur1Cuttack1

Key Topics

Section 1174Addition to Income66Section 143(3)60Section 10(34)38Section 14738Section 13(1)(d)32Section 14825Exemption25Section 6824

MOHAN THANKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 713/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

Showing 1–20 of 241 · Page 1 of 13

...
Section 14A24
Disallowance21
Charitable Trust18

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 711/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 718/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 709/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRLE - 5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 2089/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 712/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 710/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

house property, undisclosed income and disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act for all these assessment years so far as jurisdiction is concerned. 034. Of course, merits of each of the addition would be decided separately as per separate grounds raised. 035. With respect to the argument of the assessee that for assessment year

TODI INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 8(3)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 895/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2024AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 22Section 37

property' then any income in\nthe form of other income cannot be brought to tax under any\nhead. After referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt in East India Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd\nvs. CIT reported in 42 ITR 49(SC), he held that the ultimate\ntest for assessing the head of income

DCIT-CC-5(4), MUMBAI vs. RAGHULEELA ESTATES PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5740/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 24

section 24(b) of the Act on the ground that preconstruction interest shall be allowed only to the extent of the cost of the property which is finally acquired/constructed. Your Appellant submits that on the facts of the case the preconstruction interest has been rightly claimed by the Appellant, being one-fifth of the interest paid on funds utilized

DCIT-CC-5(4), MUMBAI vs. RAGHULEELA ESTATES PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5741/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 24

section 24(b) of the Act on the ground that preconstruction interest shall be allowed only to the extent of the cost of the property which is finally acquired/constructed. Your Appellant submits that on the facts of the case the preconstruction interest has been rightly claimed by the Appellant, being one-fifth of the interest paid on funds utilized

DCIT -CC-5(4), MUMBAI vs. RAGHULEELA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5739/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 24

section 24(b) of the Act on the ground that preconstruction interest shall be allowed only to the extent of the cost of the property which is finally acquired/constructed. Your Appellant submits that on the facts of the case the preconstruction interest has been rightly claimed by the Appellant, being one-fifth of the interest paid on funds utilized

FERANI HOTELS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 3859/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay SawantFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Heliwal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 80

House Property.” “1. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIMAL is right on restricting the addition of annual letting value to 2.5% instead of @7% made by AO?” 2. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in late, the CIT(A) is right in directing the AO to compute

SAURASHTRA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1182/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2023AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Hande (Sr. AR)
Section 11Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 24Section 263

Section 23 of the Act; and therefore the assessee trust is entitled to deduction u/s 24(a) of the Act on the amount of Rs.2,49,10,751/- which is received by the trust in pursuant to the agreement for amenities and credited in the books of accounts as services charges. And for supporting this averment, furnished copy of agreement

DCIT- 8(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. PIRAMAL ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2015/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi/Priyank Gandhi/MsFor Respondent: Shri N. V. Nadkarni, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 24Section 250

property; and (ii) the deduction under section 24(b) of the Act cannot be allowed on the basis of area let out. In our view, the reasons on the basis of which the Assessing Officer disallowed deduction under section 24(b) of the Act are unacceptable. Undisputedly, the loan was sanctioned for construction of the entire building. When a part

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6085/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

section 36(1)(1)(va) of the Act is prospective in nature and the various courts have held that the respective payments made before filing the return of income is allowable expenditure u/s. 43B of the Act. Therefore, respectfully following the same, we are inclined to allow the grounds raised by the assessee. 55. In the result, appeal

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6963/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

section 36(1)(1)(va) of the Act is prospective in nature and the various courts have held that the respective payments made before filing the return of income is allowable expenditure u/s. 43B of the Act. Therefore, respectfully following the same, we are inclined to allow the grounds raised by the assessee. 55. In the result, appeal

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-6(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4369/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Arati Vissanji &For Respondent: Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

section 36(1)(1)(va) of the Act is prospective in nature and the various courts have held that the respective payments made before filing the return of income is allowable expenditure u/s. 43B of the Act. Therefore, respectfully following the same, we are inclined to allow the grounds raised by the assessee. 55. In the result, appeal

AKANSHA YOGESH DESHMUKH,BPCL STAFF COLONY vs. ITO/DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION MUMBAI, INCOME TAX BUILDING

ITA 8949/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

House Ballard\nEstate\nMumbai - 400001\nPAN/GIR No. BDJPP6182R\n(Applicant)\n(Respondent)\nAssessee by\nNone\nRevenue by\nShr Krishna Kumar (SR. DR.)\nDate of Hearing\n18.02.2026\nDate of Pronouncement\n19.02.2026\nआदेश / ORDER\nPER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:\nThe present appeal has been filed by the assessee\nchallenging the impugned order 30.10.2025 passed u/s\n250 of the Income

ACIT- 17 (3), MUMBAI vs. TATA SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee’s and revenue

ITA 3152/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3079/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2012-13) Tata Social Welfare Trust बिधम/ Ito (Exemption)-2(4) Bombay House, (Now Assessed By The Acit- Vs. 24, Homi Mody Street, 17(3), Mumbai), Piramal Fort, Mumbai-400001. Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012. Pan No: Aaatt9834B

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor (dR)
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(d)

House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Marg, 24, Homi Mody Street, Mumbai-400020. Fort, Mumbai-400001. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAATT9835A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Sukhsagar Syal Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Damor (dR) ITA No.3079 & 3080/Mum/2018 3152 & 3153/Mum/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 Tata Social Welfare Trust & Tata Education Trust सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing

ACIT- 17 (3), MUMBAI vs. TATA EDUCATION TRUST, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee’s and revenue

ITA 3153/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3079/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2012-13) Tata Social Welfare Trust बिधम/ Ito (Exemption)-2(4) Bombay House, (Now Assessed By The Acit- Vs. 24, Homi Mody Street, 17(3), Mumbai), Piramal Fort, Mumbai-400001. Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012. Pan No: Aaatt9834B

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar SyalFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor (dR)
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(d)

House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Marg, 24, Homi Mody Street, Mumbai-400020. Fort, Mumbai-400001. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAATT9835A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Sukhsagar Syal Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Damor (dR) ITA No.3079 & 3080/Mum/2018 3152 & 3153/Mum/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 Tata Social Welfare Trust & Tata Education Trust सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing