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.

278 results for “house property”+ Section 36(1)(viii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi454Mumbai278Bangalore152Chandigarh104Jaipur65Cochin59Ahmedabad43Hyderabad40Chennai32Raipur30Indore28Pune22Guwahati21Rajkot19Nagpur18Kolkata14SC14Agra9Lucknow8Cuttack8Patna7Surat3Amritsar3Jodhpur2Visakhapatnam1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Ranchi1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 14A62Addition to Income49Section 143(3)47Disallowance40Section 14729Penalty28Section 153A22Depreciation19Section 145A18Section 148

STATE BANK OF MYSORE,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

ITA 661/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 2Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 41(1)

housing in India. On perusal of the findings of the coordinate bench in assessee's own case for earlier years on the impugned issue we notice that this issue has been allowed on the ground that the principal of consistency should be followed and that the assessee's claim from AY 2008-09 following the same methodology has not been

Showing 1–20 of 278 · Page 1 of 14

...
17
Section 11517
Section 35D17

DY..C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S STATE BANK OF MYSORE, BANGALORE

ITA 684/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 2Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 41(1)

housing in India. On perusal of the findings of the coordinate bench in assessee's own case for earlier years on the impugned issue we notice that this issue has been allowed on the ground that the principal of consistency should be followed and that the assessee's claim from AY 2008-09 following the same methodology has not been

DCIT - 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORARTION LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 2862/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

housing as well as \ndevelopment of infrastructure facility in India. In aggregation, deduction \nclaimed is restricted to special reserve so created in the year. According \nto the assessee, it qualifies as a “specified entity” for the purpose of \nclause (a) of Explanation to section 36(1)(viii), falling within sub-clause \n(vi) as “any other financial corporation including

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOP,MENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 286/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2000-2001
For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)

houses in India for residential purposes. In view thereof, the ld AR\nprayed that deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act may be granted in re-\nspect of all the aforesaid three categories of receipts. In this regard reliance is\nplaced on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Standard Refinery & Dis-\ntillery

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORP. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR. 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7447/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 1999-2000
Section 143(3)

houses in India for residential purposes. In view thereof, the ld AR\nprayed that deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act may be granted in re-\nspect of all the aforesaid three categories of receipts. In this regard reliance is\nplaced on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Standard Refinery & Dis-\ntillery

DCIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 7532/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 1999-2000
Section 143(3)

houses in India for residential purposes. In view thereof, the ld AR\nprayed that deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act may be granted in re-\nspect of all the aforesaid three categories of receipts. In this regard reliance is\nplaced on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Standard Refinery & Dis-\ntillery

M/S. HOUSING DEVELOP,MENT FINANCE CORPN. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ADDL CIT RG-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 287/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2001-2002
Section 143(3)

houses in India for residential purposes. In view thereof, the ld AR\nprayed that deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act may be granted in re-\nspect of all the aforesaid three categories of receipts. In this regard reliance is\nplaced on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Standard Refinery & Dis-\ntillery

THE DY CIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 337/MUM/2005[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2000-2001
Section 143(3)

houses in India for residential purposes. In view thereof, the ld AR\nprayed that deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act may be granted in re-\nspect of all the aforesaid three categories of receipts. In this regard reliance is\nplaced on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Standard Refinery & Dis-\ntillery

THE DY CIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the three appeals by the Revenue are partly\nallowed

ITA 724/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2024AY 2001-2002
Section 143(3)

houses in India for residential purposes. In view thereof, the ld AR\nprayed that deduction under section 36(1)(viii) of the Act may be granted in re-\nspect of all the aforesaid three categories of receipts. In this regard reliance is\nplaced on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Standard Refinery & Dis-\ntillery

HOUSING DEVP. FIN.CORPN. LTD. vs. THE ADIT CIR. 1(1),

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 552/MUM/2004[98-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2024
Section 144Section 36(1)(viii)

houses\nin India for residential purposes. In view thereof, the ld AR prayed that deduction\nunder section 36(1)(viii) of the Act may be granted in respect of all the aforesaid\nthree categories of receipts. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of the\nApex Court in the case of Standard Refinery & Distillery

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4313/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

36(1)(viii). 15. This issue arises in the following appeals: Assessment year Ground No. in Ground No. in Assessee's appeal Revenue's appeal 2004-05 - 2 2006-07 - 3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions for contingency

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5033/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

36(1)(viii). 15. This issue arises in the following appeals: Assessment year Ground No. in Ground No. in Assessee's appeal Revenue's appeal 2004-05 - 2 2006-07 - 3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions for contingency

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2867/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

36(1)(viii). 15. This issue arises in the following appeals: Assessment year Ground No. in Ground No. in Assessee's appeal Revenue's appeal 2004-05 - 2 2006-07 - 3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions for contingency

ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3785/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

36(1)(viii). 15. This issue arises in the following appeals: Assessment year Ground No. in Ground No. in Assessee's appeal Revenue's appeal 2004-05 - 2 2006-07 - 3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions for contingency

ICICI HOME FINANCE COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1325/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: R.A. Dhyani
Section 14ASection 201Section 250Section 36(1)(viii)Section 36(1)(viil)Section 37(1)

section 36(1)(viii) of the Act for the income earned from housing finance business. 2. The appellant earns interest income from the securitization trust ('the trust') based on its purchase of units /security receipts/pass through certificates issued by the trust. The trust received interest income from the underlying assets held by it, being the housing loans. M/s. ICICI Home

ACIT-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., DELHI

ITA 2049/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

property.\nX V. Additional claim of the Assessee with regard to inadvertent suo\nmoto disallowance made during the course of the assessment\nproceedings.\nX V I. Refund of excess dividend distribution tax (DDT).\nX V II. Transfer pricing adjustment in respect of specified domestic\ntransactions (SDT) covered by section 40A(2)(b).\nXVIII. Disallowance of year-end provisions.\nXIX. Increasing

ACIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LTD ( MERGED ENTITY HDFC INVESTMENTS LIMITED ), MUMBAI

ITA 2980/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

36(1)(viii). \nVIII. Disallowance of entrance fees and subscriptions paid to clubs. \nIX. Exemption u/s.54EC in respect of capital gains arising on \ndepreciable assets. \nX. Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. \nXI. Set-off of short-term capital loss. \nXII. Income from India Value Fund. \n\nXIII. Addition on account of receipts as per the ITS details not found \nrecorded

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, RANGE-1(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1890/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

section 50(1) and (2) is restricted only \nto the mode of computation of capital gains contained in Section 48 and \n49 and does not apply to other provisions, since fiction created by the \nlegislature has to be confined to the purpose to which it is created. Also, \nthat section 54E does not make any distinction between depreciable \nassets

ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5707/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

36(1)(viii). \nVIII. Disallowance of entrance fees and subscriptions paid to clubs. \nIX. Exemption u/s.54EC in respect of capital gains arising on \ndepreciable assets. \nX. Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. \nXI. Set-off of short-term capital loss. \nXII. Income from India Value Fund.\n\n11 \nHDFC Bank Ltd. \nITA No.4315/MUM/2007 and Ors. \nAYs

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HDFC LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2665/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

36(1)(viii). \nVIII. Disallowance of entrance fees and subscriptions paid to clubs. \nIX. Exemption u/s.54EC in respect of capital gains arising on \ndepreciable assets. \nX. Disallowance of FCCB issue expenses. \nXI. Set-off of short-term capital loss. \nXII. Income from India Value Fund. \nXIII. Addition on account of receipts as per the ITS details not found \nrecorded