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.

8 results for “house property”+ Section 43Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai271Delhi171Chennai93Kolkata61Bangalore60Raipur37Pune18Jaipur16Hyderabad14Lucknow12Ahmedabad9Nagpur8Karnataka5Visakhapatnam3Chandigarh3SC3Surat2Dehradun2Telangana1Calcutta1Cuttack1Indore1Jodhpur1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 153A12Section 26310Section 143(3)6Section 406Disallowance6Addition to Income6Section 682Section 43B2

SUFALAM INFRA PROJECTS LTD ,NAGPUR vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL ), NAGPUR

In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 97/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya, CTI DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

43B of the Act from 01-04-1984 came up for consideration in Allied Motors Private Limited v. CIT (1997) 91 taxman 205(SC) before Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was given retrospective effect from the inception of the section on the reasoning that the proviso was added to remedy ITA NO.97/NAG/2019 & ITA NO. 46/NAG/2021 & CO NO.6/NAG/2023 Sufalam Infra

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. M/S. SUFLAM INFRA PROJECT LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, the departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 46/NAG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya, CTI DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

43B of the Act from 01-04-1984 came up for consideration in Allied Motors Private Limited v. CIT (1997) 91 taxman 205(SC) before Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was given retrospective effect from the inception of the section on the reasoning that the proviso was added to remedy ITA NO.97/NAG/2019 & ITA NO. 46/NAG/2021 & CO NO.6/NAG/2023 Sufalam Infra

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL COAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

ITA 18/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: \nShri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

house property of Rs.1,05,000/- as business income\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in\ndeleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.37,012/-and\ntreating the same as business income, which was claimed as deduction u/s.24\nby the assessee\n6. On the facts and in the circumstances

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

In the result, Revenue's appeal being ITA no

ITA 293/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

43B of Rs. 1,27,653/-.\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in\ndeleting the addition made on account of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of Rs.\n4,77,67,712/-.\n6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in\ndeleting the addition

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 being ITA no

ITA 171/NAG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2006-07
For Appellant: \nShri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: \nShri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

43B of Rs. 1,27,653/-.\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in\ndeleting the addition made on account of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of Rs.\n4,77,67,712/-.\n6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in\ndeleting the addition

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 being ITA no

ITA 172/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: \nShri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40

43B of Rs. 1,27,653/-.\n5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in\ndeleting the addition made on account of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of Rs.\n4,77,67,712/-.\n6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in\ndeleting the addition

DY. C.I.T. CENTRAL CIR2(2), NAGPUR vs. M/S SHREE AGRAWAL COAL INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal being ITA no

ITA 23/NAG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40Section 43B

43B of Rs. 1,27,653/-. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of Rs. 4,77,67,712/-. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition

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

In the result, Revenue’s appeal being ITA no

ITA 292/NAG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 153ASection 40Section 43B

43B of Rs. 1,27,653/-. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of Rs. 4,77,67,712/-. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition