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.

2 results for “house property”+ Set Off of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,459Delhi1,670Bangalore674Chennai475Kolkata434Karnataka424Jaipur307Ahmedabad269Hyderabad222Chandigarh198Pune144Indore92Cochin86Rajkot75Raipur75Telangana72Surat57Amritsar52Lucknow48SC45Cuttack44Patna44Nagpur42Calcutta40Visakhapatnam31Guwahati25Agra15Jodhpur10Varanasi7Kerala7Dehradun5Allahabad4Panaji4Rajasthan4Jabalpur3Orissa2Ranchi1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Himachal Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1,BHUBANESWAR vs. SEKHAR KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ITA/9/2024HC Orissa15 Apr 2024

Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Prashant Vidyarthy, Sr. Panel Counsel
Section 164Section 42

loss to the tune of Rs. 2,88,52,506.25/- (Rupees Two Crores Eighty Eight Lakhs Fifty Two Thousand Five Hundred Six Point Two Five only) and corresponding wrongful gain to themselves and others. 4. The investigation further revealed that Dr. Pradeep Kumar received illegal gratification amount to Rs. 4,85,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores Eighty-Five Lakhs only

PRINCIPAL COMNR. OF INCOME TAX, SAMBALPUR RANGE vs. M/S. TATA SPONGE IRON LTD.

ITA/96/2022HC Orissa17 Aug 2023

MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

Bench:

sets out some of the conditions when the ―reason to doubt‖ exists. The instances mentioned in sub-clauses (a) to (f) are not exhaustive but are inclusive for there could be other instances when the proper officer could reasonably doubt the accuracy or truth of the value declared. 18. The choice of words deployed in Rule