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.

4 results for “house property”+ Section 260clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka586Mumbai421Delhi395Bangalore222Jaipur66Telangana52Calcutta51Ahmedabad28Kolkata27Hyderabad24Chennai24Cuttack23Chandigarh21Pune21Rajkot15Lucknow14Surat12SC10Indore9Varanasi7Nagpur6Cochin6Agra4Allahabad4Patna4Rajasthan3Visakhapatnam3Jabalpur2Andhra Pradesh2H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1Himachal Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1Raipur1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 54F8Addition to Income4Section 2503Section 54B2Section 143(3)2Section 1482Section 133(6)2Section 50C2Long Term Capital Gains2

VINOD YADAV,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (3), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 398/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Feb 2026AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Chowdhary, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)(ii)Section 50CSection 53A

260 ITR 491\n(Bombay)/[2003] 180 CTR 107 (Bombay)[13-02-2003], however, the\nfacts are distinguishable as in that case the substantial payments were\nmade at the time of execution of joint development agreement.\n2.2. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials\navailable on record, we find that the assessee has entered into a Land\nDevelopment

HARI NARAYAN GUPTA (HUF),PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (5), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 384/PAT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Feb 2026AY 2011-12
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 2(47)(v)Section 50C

260 ITR 491\n(Bombay)/[2003] 180 CTR 107 (Bombay) [13-02-2003], however,\nthe facts are distinguishable as in that case the substantial payments\nwere made at the time of execution of joint development agreement.\nAfter hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials\navailable on record, we find that the assessee has entered into a\nLand Development Agreement

SRIRAM ENTERPRISES,BHAGALPUR vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PATNA, PATNA

ITA 607/PAT/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Oct 2025AY 2021-2022
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

house property,\nprofit of ₹12,16,69,526/- from business and ₹1,12,438/- as income\nfrom other sources. There are two partners of the assessee-firm namely,\n1. Shri Shiv Kumar Agarwal and 2. Shri Roshan Kumar Agarwal. The\nreturn was selected for complete scrutiny under Computer Assisted\nScrutiny Selection (in short 'CASS') and statutory notices

SUNIL KUMAR SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (1), PATNA

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

ITA 390/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: the sale of immovable properties on which long term capital gain was derived.

Section 250Section 251(2)Section 3Section 54BSection 54F

property as per Rol amounting to Rs. 14.42 lakhs vis-a-vis Rs. 12,36,730/- without appreciating the fact that the claim of Rs.12.36 lakhs as per circle rate of F.Y.2001-02 issued by Govt. of Bihar. 10. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has denying deduction u/s 54F and 54B amounting to Rs.2,89,07,000/- (Rs.1.58 crore