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.

56 results for “house property”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,485Delhi1,183Bangalore373Jaipur352Chennai301Hyderabad286Ahmedabad225Pune213Chandigarh185Kolkata177Cochin146Indore129SC79Rajkot71Visakhapatnam65Surat64Raipur64Nagpur56Amritsar53Lucknow51Patna42Cuttack38Agra33Jodhpur26Dehradun12Jabalpur11Allahabad7Guwahati7Varanasi6Panaji5Ranchi4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)56Section 153A51Addition to Income49Section 6832Disallowance25Section 4024Deduction23Section 54F19Section 14816House Property

JEETENDRA CHANDRAKANT NAYAK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOM TAX(OSD), NAGPUR

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

ITA 368/NAG/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri M.G.Moryani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 54F

property under construction though of residential nature could not be categorized as " Residential House" and accordingly deduction under section 54F was allowed

SHRIRAM NARAYAN TIKDE,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX, WARD 4(4) , NAGPUR

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3

16
Business Income15
Exemption14
ITA 89/NAG/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234BSection 50C(2)Section 54Section 68

house property was completed on 31/07/2008 i.e within three years of sale deed of property sold dt. 06/11/2007. 6. That apart from incorrect appreciation of fact regarding period of construction, there is no other objection/s raised with regards to deduction

SANJAY GULABCHAND GUPTA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 210/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(2)Section 54Section 54F

property the construction cannot precede the date of transfer of original asset giving rise to Capital gains. It is now judicially very well settled that there can be no denial of deduction I exemption u/s 54F for commencing construction of new house

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 176/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 24

house property of Rs. 3,18,989/- as business income. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.1,36,709/- and 2 Shree Agarwal Finance India Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.176/Nag./2016 treating the same as business income, which was claimed as deduction

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR vs. M/S SAS DEVELOPERS & ENGINEERS `, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 82/NAG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Moriyani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 24

deduction of interest on housing loan, where the clear nexus of utilisation towards the house property is missing. At the time

VAISHALI ARVIND TAYADE,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, AMARAVATI

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 374/NAG/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 80C

deduction is available on income from house property. It is allowable as a deduction while computing income from house property

SUSHILA BHAURAO DESHMUKH,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 76/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: ShriK.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 54BSection 54E

deductions which is as under: i) There are two aspects in the said sale transaction. The sale of property consists of land and a house

NEST HOSPITALITY,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(2), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 173/NAG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Section 148Section 24

House Property” for the year under consideration in the following manner:– “Returned Income Nil (no return) Rental Income ` 23,72,609 Less: Deduction

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S GIGEO CONSTRUCTION CO.PVT. LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 488/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 40Section 40A(3)

house property. 3. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 3. For the assessment year 2008–09, the Revenue in its appeal has raised following grounds:– “1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of Rs.44

GIGEO CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD.,,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(3),, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 97/NAG/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 40Section 40A(3)

house property. 3. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 3. For the assessment year 2008–09, the Revenue in its appeal has raised following grounds:– “1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of Rs.44

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S GIGEO CONSTRUCTION CO.PVT. LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 486/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 40Section 40A(3)

house property. 3. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 3. For the assessment year 2008–09, the Revenue in its appeal has raised following grounds:– “1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 40A(3) of Rs.44

SMT . RAJANI SURENDRA ADAMANE ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), NAGPUR

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 103/NAG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhrysmt. Rajani Surendra Ito, Ward-4(4), Nagpur Adamane, Plot No.30, Near Ghodke School Surendra Vs. Nagar, Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur-440024. Pan: Alapa 9897 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R
Section 250Section 50CSection 54(2)Section 54F

deduction should not be denied on hyper technical ground. Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Mir Gulam Ali Khan Vs. CIT, (1987) 165 ITR 228 (AP) has held that the object of granting exemption under Section 54 of the Act is that an assessee who sells a residential house for purchasing another house must be given exemption

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH D. GUPTA, NAGPUR

ITA 106/NAG/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Shikha Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 24

deduction of Rs.40,947/- claimed u/s 24 of the Act made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of interest paid on borrowed loan ignoring the fact that the assessee failed to produce bank certificate in support of his claim that the loan was for the purpose of house property

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 173/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2008-09
Section 143(3)Section 153A

house property of Rs.1,10,250/- as\nbusiness income\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.33,075/-\nand treating the same as business income, which was claimed as deduction

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S THANJAVUR COMMERCE PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 178/NAG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 153A

house property of Rs.1,10,250/- as\nbusiness income\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.33,075/-\nand treating the same as business income, which was claimed as deduction

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S MANSA AGRO FOOD PROCESSING PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 375/NAG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 153A

house property of Rs.1,10,250/- as\nbusiness income\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.33,075/-\nand treating the same as business income, which was claimed as deduction

A,C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.- 2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI DHARAMPAL R.AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 294/NAG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 153A

house property of Rs.1,10,250/- as\nbusiness income\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.33,075/-\nand treating the same as business income, which was claimed as deduction

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

ITA 175/NAG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 153A

house property of Rs.1,10,250/- as\nbusiness income\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.33,075/-\nand treating the same as business income, which was claimed as deduction

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR.-2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL FINANCE INDIA P. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 174/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 153A

house property of Rs.1,10,250/- as\nbusiness income\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred\nin deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.33,075/-\nand treating the same as business income, which was claimed as deduction

VINAY RAMSHARANDAS AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 110/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 263

house property, income from capital gain and income from other sources. Necessary enquiries were conducted by the Assessing Officer by issuing 4 Vinay Ramsharandas Agrawal ITA no.110/Nag./2023 statutory notices in response to which the assessee furnished details of sources of income, capital introduction and specific details of capital gain were called and examined. The assessee, in response