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.

73 results for “house property”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai658Delhi599Jaipur236Chennai215Hyderabad200Bangalore161Chandigarh120Cochin99Ahmedabad79Kolkata75Pune73Indore58Amritsar57Nagpur48Lucknow45Visakhapatnam44Surat31Raipur29Rajkot28Guwahati27Agra26Cuttack18SC17Patna10Allahabad7Jodhpur6Jabalpur5Varanasi5Dehradun3Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 14874Addition to Income53Section 143(3)52Section 14740Section 115B37Section 69A33Cash Deposit28Section 143(2)27Section 142(1)26Section 144

TATYASAHEB NARAYAN LAGAD,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(2), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1587/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18 Tatyasaheb Narayan Lagad Ito, Ward 6(2), Pune B-504, Crossover Country, Sinhagad Vs. Road, Wadgaon Khurd, Pune – 411041 Pan: Acypl2714L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora Department By : Shri Vishwas Mundhe Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Vishwas Mundhe
Section 143(2)Section 69A

cash in hand as on 31.03.2015 but somehow 'NIL' has been mentioned against this column. The appellant stated that he is an individual, a partner in a partnership firms and derives income from house property, income from partnership firms. income from Capital Gains, and income from other sources and deposited

Showing 1–20 of 73 · Page 1 of 4

24
House Property23
Reopening of Assessment16

PRAVIN NARAYAN ATTARDE,JALGAON vs. ITO WARD 1(1) JALGAON, JALGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 267/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.267/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Vinay KawdiaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

house and admission for MDS. There is clearly established that the reason given for cash in hand not justifiable. Perusal of the assessment order, the appellant explained before the AO that during the F.Y. 2016-17, he had purchased a Flat being No. 901 in Stargaze Apartment Pune on 02.07.2016 from Kolte Patil Developers, Pune for Rs.98,35,764, Stamp

SADHANA ASHOK BHANDARI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 5(1), PUNE

In the result, Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1615/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1615/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sadhana Ashok Bhandari, V The Income Tax Officer, Queenies Duplex, Vidyasagar S Ward-5(1), Pune. Colonym, Salisbury Park, Market Yard, Pune – 411037. Pan: Agmpb0289Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Rishabh Patni – Ca/Ar Revenue By Shri Prakash L Pathade - Dr Date Of Hearing 14/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 25/11/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] For A.Y.2017- 18 Dated 14.06.2024 Passed U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On Facts & Circumstances Prevailing In The Case & As Per Provisions & Scheme Of The Act, It Be Held That The Ld.Ao Framed The Assessment Order Without Issuing Show Cause Notice To The Appellant Is Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice & Not In Accordance With The Provisions Of Law. The Assessment So Framed Shall Be Treated As Null & Void. Appellant Be Granted Just & Proper Relief In This Respect.

Section 250Section 69A

deposits of Rs.7,27,000/- made during the Demonetization Period. Assessee submitted before the Assessing Officer(AO) that the cash was out of her accumulated cash balances. Assessee submitted cash book and bank statement for verification. Assessee submitted that she has income from house property

VTP FOODS,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 7 (3), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2878/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR
Section 143(2)

House, Plot No 3, 4 and 5, Sr. Vs. No.34A/6, Behind Shakti Sports, Nagar Road, Wadgaonsheri, Pune – 411014 PAN: AACAV1580B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department by : Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR Date of hearing : 26-03-2025 Date of pronouncement : 30-04-2025 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal

ROHIDAS BHIKU JAMBHULKAR,HINJAWADI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) CIT (A), PUNE-3, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2530/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2530/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rohidas Bhiku Jambhulkar, V The Commissioner Of At Hinjawadi, Near Ganesh S Income Tax (Appeals) Mandir, Tal.Mulshi, Cit(A), Pune – 3. Dist-Pune – 411057. Pan: Ahypj9277D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri J.G.Bhumkar – Ar Revenue By Shri Sanjay Dhivare –Addl.Cit(Dr) Through Virtual Hearing Date Of Hearing 05/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21/02/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Manish Borad, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] For Assessment Year 2012-13 Dated 28.08.2024 Passed U/Sec.250 Of

Section 139(1)Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 44Section 44A

house property of Rs.1,77,800/- was also in cash. These cash amounts was deposited in cash. Also, time deposit

NILESH POPATLAL GADA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(4) , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1538/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 250Section 68

house property, short term capital gain, income from other sources and agricultural 5 income. The Assessing Officer(AO) in the assessment order observed that assessee had deposited cash

TANAJI PARILAL GAWADE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 12(4) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1589/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Bharat ShahFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 80C

house property be allowed. Just and proper relief be granted to the assessee in this respect. 5) Without prejudice to the above legal Grounds of Appeal learned assessing officer has erred in appreciating the fact that the cash deposits

HOTEL SURYA PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ITO, WAD-11(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 395/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari - CIT
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(2)

Cash deposits during the demonetization period, (ii) Low receipt from house property in ITR in compared to rental receipts stated

HOTEL SURYA PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 11(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 396/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari - CIT
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(2)

Cash deposits during the demonetization period, (ii) Low receipt from house property in ITR in compared to rental receipts stated

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, PANVEL, PANVEL DIST. RAIGAD vs. SHAILESHKUMAR DINESHBHAI PATEL, TAL. MHASALA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1353/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144

property. He was only a representative capacity. Addition was deleted. The appellant further relied on the case of ITO vs. Vinod Chadha (2016) (73 taxmann.com 118) wherein hon'ble Delhi-tribunal concluded that cash deposited in assessee's saving 'bank account was sales of partnership firm in which assessee was partner and same was duly explained with help of sales

MR. MANOJ N. PERE,AURANGABAD vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), AURANGABAD

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

ITA 2676/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2676/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mr. Manoj Nandikishor Ito, Ward-1(1), Pere, Aurangabad A3, 01St Floor, Manohar Vs. Vastu, Opp. Hi Tech Computers, Tilak Nagar, Aurangabad-431005 Maharashtra Pan-Amupp7701M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By: Cas Ravindra S. Darekar & Prasad S. Bhandari (Through Virtual) Department By: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing: 07-08-2025 Date Of 13-08-2025 Pronouncement:

For Appellant: CAs Ravindra S. Darekar &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

cash deposit of Rs. 50,00,000/- in bank is from explained sources. 3) On the facts and in law the A.O. has erred in making addition of Rs. 1,60,650/- on account of interest income/income from house property

RATHOD JEWELLERS,PUNE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(3), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1385/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

deposited cash of Rs. 2.33Crores in its bank account in Janta Sahakari Bank and subsequently transferred to the various beneficiaries including the appellant. Assessing Officer had reason to believe that the appellant's income had escaped assessment. Based on this information the Assessing Officer had reason to believe that income had escaped assessment and accordingly he issued notice

MANISHA VIKRANT SHAH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 12(1) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1148/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri C.V. DespandeFor Respondent: Shri Pawan Bharati
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 27Section 271DSection 275(1)(c)

deposits. Statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 28.09.2018 which was duly served upon the assessee. In response thereto, the assessee submitted details called for. It was noticed therefrom that the assessee had accepted Rs.50,00,000/- in cash on sale of immovable property as per the sale agreement dated 30.08.2016 during the relevant previous year

BHUJBAL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2137/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay &
Section 142Section 142(1)Section 144Section 43C

property to the DVO arises regular prices, therefore there was no occasion for Ld. CIT(A), to refer the matter to the DVO. Accordingly, we do not find any substance in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that the matter of valuation of some of the flats/ shops should be referred to the DVO. Accordingly

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. BHUJBAL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2119/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Respondent: Shri Chandra Vijay &
Section 142Section 142(1)Section 144Section 43C

property to the DVO arises regular prices, therefore there was no occasion for Ld. CIT(A), to refer the matter to the DVO. Accordingly, we do not find any substance in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that the matter of valuation of some of the flats/ shops should be referred to the DVO. Accordingly

ARJUN BHAGARAM PARMAR,RATNAGIRI vs. WARD-1, RATNAGIRI, RATNAGIRI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as per terms indicated herein above

ITA 115/PUN/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं / Ita No.115/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Arjun Bhagaram Parmar, Vs Ward-1, Room No. 11, Swar Vihar, Ratnagiri Garah Sankulan Sarang, Khend, Tal-Chiplun, Ratnagiri-415605 Maharashtra Pan-Ayqpm4825M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 44A

cash deposit during demonetization period at Rs. 4,23,000/- and addition for estimated profits @ 10% on the remaining credits in the bank found to be from business transactions. In the paper book filed by the assessee which is running in 72 pages assessee has filed various details including financial statement purchases/sale bills, registration certificate, computation of income, Tax Challan

NIRMALABAI F. JALNAPURE,PUNE vs. ASST. UNIT INCOME TAX, PUNE

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

ITA 798/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.798/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Vs Asst. Unit Nirmalabai F. Jalnapure, Flat No. B/2, Priyanka Income Tax, Residency, Opp. Pmc Pune School, Hadapsar, Pune- 41128 Maharashtra Pan-Azipj3217D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

cash deposits of Rs. 30,02,000/- assessee claimed that it received income from House Property at Rs. 3,60,000/-, sale

VITHOBA DADA SHIRSATH,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD2(1) NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2352/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh PardeshiFor Respondent: Shri Harish Bist
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

house., and therefore, the same were not liable to be treated as unexplained money. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law lower authorities have erred in making an addition of Rs. 31,15,000/- u/s 69A – Unexplained Money, being summations of certain cash deposits/credit entries in bank account by rejecting the appellant

PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2340/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 132ASection 144Section 153ASection 69A

House No. 1275, Vindhare Village Post Digode, Tal Uran Panvel, Vs. Dist. Raigad-401206 PAN : ASJPP8541J अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Prakash Pandit Department by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 02-02-2026 Date of 18-02-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : The above three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against

PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO - WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2339/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 132ASection 144Section 153ASection 69A

House No. 1275, Vindhare Village Post Digode, Tal Uran Panvel, Vs. Dist. Raigad-401206 PAN : ASJPP8541J अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Prakash Pandit Department by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 02-02-2026 Date of 18-02-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : The above three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against