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.

1,707 results for “house property”+ Section 80clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,707Delhi1,672Bangalore690Karnataka599Chennai343Jaipur299Kolkata258Ahmedabad229Hyderabad204Chandigarh182Surat163Pune111Cochin96Indore87Telangana75Raipur62Amritsar61Calcutta53Rajkot45Lucknow45Nagpur38SC27Cuttack25Visakhapatnam24Guwahati23Agra18Varanasi13Rajasthan10Jodhpur8Kerala6Orissa5Dehradun4Allahabad3Patna3Jabalpur2Punjab & Haryana2Panaji2Himachal Pradesh1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)81Addition to Income63Section 14738Disallowance36Section 14A34Section 14833Deduction26Section 271(1)(c)24Section 80I22

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3398/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

property’. [CIT\nv Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd (2016) 72 Taxman.com 254].\nThus, the AO is not justified in treating the rental receipts of Rs.\n3,70,00,453/- as business receipts and deny the Appellant standard\ndeduction amounting to Rs.1,10,35,995/- allowable under section 24(a)\nof the Act.\n12.ITA 3397/MUM/2024

CIDCO EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. WARD 28(1)(3), NAVI MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 1,707 · Page 1 of 86

...
Section 145A19
Section 143(1)17
Exemption17

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

ITA 700/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Gagan Goyalcidco Employees Co-Op. Credit Society, Ground Floor, Cidco Bhavan, Cbd Belapur, Navi Mumbai – 400 614 Pan:Aaaac2203N ..... Appellant Vs. Ito Ward 28(1) (3)/ Nfac Delhi ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt, Ld. DR
Section 143Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)Section 80Section 80P

house property chargeable under Section 22. Explanation. —for the purposes of this section an “urban consumers’ cooperative society” means a society for the benefit of the consumers within the limits of a municipal corporation, municipality, municipal committee, notified area committee, town area or cantonment. (3) In a case where the assessee is entitled also to the deduction under Section 80

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3396/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

section 24(a) of the Act. The contention of the AO that the\nassessee is carrying out an organized activity of development and\nconstruction of godowns which are held as stock-in-trade and thus, the\nrental income generated in the course of the business has to be taxed as\nbusiness income and not as income from house property

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1 , KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3395/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

section 24(a) of the Act. The contention of the AO that the\nassessee is carrying out an organized activity of development and\nconstruction of godowns which are held as stock-in-trade and thus, the\nrental income generated in the course of the business has to be taxed as\nbusiness income and not as income from house property

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3397/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

section 24(a) of the Act. The contention of the AO that the\nassessee is carrying out an organized activity of development and\nconstruction of godowns which are held as stock-in-trade and thus, the\nrental income generated in the course of the business has to be taxed as\nbusiness income and not as income from house property

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. ASHISH CONSTRUCTION CO., THANE

In the result, the common question of law framed in these two appeals are answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue

ITA 4288/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2006 - 2007 Asst. Cit Circle-2, Ashish Construction Co., Thane S-1, Narmada Apartments, बनाम/ Cabin Road, Bhayander Vs. Road (E), Thane 401 105 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aajfa4249G राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri V Vidhyadhar "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Sanjay Sharma

Section 80Section 80I

housing project II and no deduction was claimed on project I, consisting of building 03 viz. Topaz Building. On verification of the plan, it was found that there was a road for the said plot with building Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 (Project II) on one side and building Nos. 10, 11 and 12 (Project I) on the other

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 46/MUM/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

80‟s, the assessee ventured into real estate market through development of "High Street Phoenix" (HSP) mall. The assessee had developed a mall with around 5 million square feet of retail space currently leased at its projects. The construction of the "immovable property" which houses the retail space to be let out is done by the assessee himself

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 48/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

80‟s, the assessee ventured into real estate market through development of "High Street Phoenix" (HSP) mall. The assessee had developed a mall with around 5 million square feet of retail space currently leased at its projects. The construction of the "immovable property" which houses the retail space to be let out is done by the assessee himself

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 49/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

80‟s, the assessee ventured into real estate market through development of "High Street Phoenix" (HSP) mall. The assessee had developed a mall with around 5 million square feet of retail space currently leased at its projects. The construction of the "immovable property" which houses the retail space to be let out is done by the assessee himself

ASST CIT CC 8(4), MUMBAI vs. PHOENIX MILLS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 242/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

80‟s, the assessee ventured into real estate market through development of "High Street Phoenix" (HSP) mall. The assessee had developed a mall with around 5 million square feet of retail space currently leased at its projects. The construction of the "immovable property" which houses the retail space to be let out is done by the assessee himself

ASST CIT CC 8(4), MUMBAI vs. PHOENIX MILLS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 241/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

80‟s, the assessee ventured into real estate market through development of "High Street Phoenix" (HSP) mall. The assessee had developed a mall with around 5 million square feet of retail space currently leased at its projects. The construction of the "immovable property" which houses the retail space to be let out is done by the assessee himself

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 52/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

80‟s, the assessee ventured into real estate market through development of "High Street Phoenix" (HSP) mall. The assessee had developed a mall with around 5 million square feet of retail space currently leased at its projects. The construction of the "immovable property" which houses the retail space to be let out is done by the assessee himself

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 47/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

80‟s, the assessee ventured into real estate market through development of "High Street Phoenix" (HSP) mall. The assessee had developed a mall with around 5 million square feet of retail space currently leased at its projects. The construction of the "immovable property" which houses the retail space to be let out is done by the assessee himself

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 50/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

80‟s, the assessee ventured into real estate market through development of "High Street Phoenix" (HSP) mall. The assessee had developed a mall with around 5 million square feet of retail space currently leased at its projects. The construction of the "immovable property" which houses the retail space to be let out is done by the assessee himself

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 51/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

80‟s, the assessee ventured into real estate market through development of "High Street Phoenix" (HSP) mall. The assessee had developed a mall with around 5 million square feet of retail space currently leased at its projects. The construction of the "immovable property" which houses the retail space to be let out is done by the assessee himself

THE DY CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. VODAFONE WEST LIMITED,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 1634/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2025AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri K.K. VedFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 45Section 47Section 48

house property'. It is,\ntherefore, directed to be considered as eligible for deduction u/s.80IA of\nthe Act.\"\nIn view of the above decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal,\nexclusion of cell site sharing revenue of INR.0.81 Crores from the business\nincome while computing deduction under Section 80IA of the Act cannot be\nsustained. Therefore, the Assessing Officer

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, disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act and addition on account of undisclosed income. 014. Assessment proceedings can be summarized as under:- Assessment Date of Returned Return Income Income year filing of income filed returned assessed as return of under under per (in Rupees) income section section assessment under 153A of 153A of the order

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, disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act and addition on account of undisclosed income. 014. Assessment proceedings can be summarized as under:- Assessment Date of Returned Return Income Income year filing of income filed returned assessed as return of under under per (in Rupees) income section section assessment under 153A of 153A of the order

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, disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act and addition on account of undisclosed income. 014. Assessment proceedings can be summarized as under:- Assessment Date of Returned Return Income Income year filing of income filed returned assessed as return of under under per (in Rupees) income section section assessment under 153A of 153A of the order

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, disallowance of exemption under section 10 (38) of the act and addition on account of undisclosed income. 014. Assessment proceedings can be summarized as under:- Assessment Date of Returned Return Income Income year filing of income filed returned assessed as return of under under per (in Rupees) income section section assessment under 153A of 153A of the order