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.

12 results for “house property”+ Section 69Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi348Mumbai262Jaipur169Bangalore131Chennai81Chandigarh75Hyderabad68Cochin67Ahmedabad52Amritsar44Pune42Indore40Agra38Surat27Lucknow24Rajkot19Visakhapatnam13Nagpur12Jodhpur12Raipur12Kolkata11Patna10Cuttack6Guwahati5Allahabad4Varanasi4SC3Dehradun3Rajasthan1Telangana1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Addition to Income12Section 69C11Section 43C10Section 1489Section 1478Section 69A8Section 139(1)8Section 143(3)6Section 1325Cash Deposit

SHRI VISHWAKARAMA JEWELLERS ,AKOLA vs. DCIT AKOLA CIRCLE, AKOLA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 99/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri S.G. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 69B

69A, excess stock is covered u/s 69 or 69B, construction of Shed/Godown is covered u/s 69B or 69C and advances made to Sundry Parties is covered u/s 69, 69B or 69D is like an open ended hypothesis which is not supported by any specific finding that the matter shall fall under which of the specific sections and how the conditions

5
Survey u/s 133A5
Search & Seizure5

SHAILESH CHAMPAKLAL VAKHARIA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME (CENTRAL) CIRCLE - 1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 344/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 69A

Property is plot. no. 51, NIT Municipal house no. 1366, MausaHivari, Wardhaman Nagar to Brindesh Agrawal for consideration of 5.21 Cr on October 2016. Govardhan Das 3 Shailesh Champaklal Vakharia ITA no.344/Nag./2023 V. As regards to Shri Mahavir Vakharia, the power of attorney is held by our assessee, Shri Shailesh Vakharia. vi. Since the document is sale agreement

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. DEEPAK SURESH GADGE, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 99/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 132Section 153Section 69C

Housing Finance Ltd. for the period from 01/04/2019 to 31/03/2020 xiv. Ledger A/c of Advance for Shares of OCHFL - Atul Yamsanwar Sir for the period from 01/04/2019 to 31/03/2020 xv. Form No. MGT-7 (Annual Return) for Financial Year 2019-20 xvi. Assessment order u/s 143(3) in the case of assessee vide order dated 13/07/2021 for Asstt. Year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. DEEPAK SURESH GADGE, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/NAG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

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

Section 132Section 153Section 69C

Housing Finance Ltd. for the period from 01/04/2019 to 31/03/2020 xiv. Ledger A/c of Advance for Shares of OCHFL - Atul Yamsanwar Sir for the period from 01/04/2019 to 31/03/2020 xv. Form No. MGT-7 (Annual Return) for Financial Year 2019-20 xvi. Assessment order u/s 143(3) in the case of assessee vide order dated 13/07/2021 for Asstt. Year

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

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 289/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: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

House Property. 3. Any other ground of appeal that may be raised at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 37. In this case, the assessee, for the year under consideration, filed its return of income on 29/09/2011, under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") disclosing total income of ` 15,03,450 and agricultural income

SMT RAJKUMARI DHARAMPAL AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 1(2), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 235/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: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

House Property. 3. Any other ground of appeal that may be raised at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 37. In this case, the assessee, for the year under consideration, filed its return of income on 29/09/2011, under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") disclosing total income of ` 15,03,450 and agricultural income

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. MAKARAND MADHUSUDAN JOSHI, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 382/NAG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

house property which is rental income of the appellant. 4 Makarand Madhusudan Joshi ITA no.382/Nag./2023 Therefore, in view of the arguments advanced by the Ld. AR and documents placed on record, I am of the considered view that the addition made of Rs. 93,000/- as unexplained Money u/s 69A is incorrect and hence addition made under Sec 69A

VANDANA DEEPAK BANKOTI,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(1), NAGPUR

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 180/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri M. G. Moryani, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54BSection 56Section 69A

property i.e. row house situated at Kasra number 94 Mouza Wathoda Tehsil and District Nagpur in the year vide agreement to sell dated 11.04.2015 and registered sale deed dated 28.06.2017 and therefore the transaction belonged to A.Y. 2018-19 as the Assessee accepted herself that entire payment of Rs.30,00,000/- was made during the F.Y. 2015-16, however

PUSHPA SUNIL DEVIKAR,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-4(4), NAGPUR

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

ITA 717/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Shabbir Bohra &For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 250Section 3Section 54FSection 69A

section 69A of the Act for unexplained money. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that source of the alleged cash deposits are from sale of self-owned gold jewellery accumulated over the years 1990- 2010 and that the sale proceeds received, has been deposited in the bank account and thereafter investment has been made for purchase

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMET AX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI SANJAY GAURISHANKAR AGRAWAL , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 148/NAG/2018[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

House Property and Other Sources. The Return of Income u/s 139 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was filed on 30/03/2016 declaring total income of Rs. 46,76,270/-. 2. Search and Seizure operation under Sec. 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was carried out on the premises of the Assessee on 02/12/2014. During the course

SHREE MAYA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 228/NAG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JakhotiaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 43C

house construction on the ground that the difference between the figure shown by the assessee and the figure of the DVO is hardly 10 percent. 15. Similarly, we find that the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO V/s. Kaaddu Jayghosh Appasaheb, vide ITA No.441/PN/2004 for the asst. yr 1992-1993 and relied on by the learned

SHREE MAYA REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 227/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JakhotiaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 43C

house construction on the ground that the difference between the figure shown by the assessee and the figure of the DVO is hardly 10 percent. 15. Similarly, we find that the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO V/s. Kaaddu Jayghosh Appasaheb, vide ITA No.441/PN/2004 for the asst. yr 1992-1993 and relied on by the learned