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.

3 results for “house property”+ Section 14A(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,027Delhi479Kolkata195Ahmedabad177Chennai134Bangalore124Karnataka115Pune62Jaipur54Hyderabad43Raipur37Indore23Visakhapatnam22Cuttack16Chandigarh12Amritsar8Rajkot8Cochin6Guwahati6Surat6Varanasi4Telangana4Lucknow4SC4Jodhpur3Calcutta3Nagpur3Panaji2

Key Topics

Section 684Section 10(38)4Section 14A3Addition to Income3Capital Gains2Long Term Capital Gains2Bogus/Accommodation Entry2Penny Stock2Exemption

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 411/NAG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

house property, income from business and income from other sources. The assessee has also shown income from exempt capital gains from transfer of equity shares. 7 Shri Nandkumar Khatumal Harchandani ITA no.410/Nag./2019 A.Y. 2014–15 The assessee has purchased 422500 shares of Swift IT Infrastructure and Services Ltd. by cheque on 16/03/2012 during the previous year relevant to Asstt

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

2
ITA 410/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: Disposed
ITAT Nagpur
25 Feb 2025
AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

3) shows that the assessing officer, not being a court could rely upon material, which might not strictly be evidence admissible under the Indian Evidence Act for the purpose of making an order of assessment. xx) On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the plain reading of section

SHRI PADMESH GUPTA,NAGPUR vs. ACITCENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(3), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 455/NAG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyhaFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Baral
Section 14A

House Property" and the learned CIT(A) erred in not deleting the addition made erroneously by the AO. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of the AO has resulted into double addition in hands of the assessee." 3. As regards the additional ground as referred to above, it transpires that the same relates to double disallowance