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 138clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka467Delhi459Mumbai320Bangalore111Chennai79Jaipur71Cochin66Ahmedabad63Hyderabad59Kolkata58Indore55Calcutta54Surat38Telangana38Raipur35Amritsar25Chandigarh24Rajkot19Lucknow15Pune12Cuttack11Patna11SC9Rajasthan9Visakhapatnam8Agra5Jabalpur5Jodhpur4Nagpur2Orissa2Andhra Pradesh2Allahabad2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Ranchi1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 80I24Section 143(3)10Addition to Income8Section 12A6Section 158B5Deduction5Section 143(2)4Section 2(22)(e)4Section 1323Disallowance

M/S. NATIONAL TEMPO HOUSE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1215/PUN/2016[BP: 1987-88 to 1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jan 2019

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1215/Pun/2016 Block Period : 1987-88 To 1997-98

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: S/Shri Avadhesh Kumar and Pankaj Garg
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 140ASection 158B

138/- by applying GP rate of 20%. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee stressed that it is case of addition on the basis of estimation and where the levy of penalty under section 158BFA(2) of the Act was discretionary, then the authorities below had the authority to drop penalty proceedings. In this regard, first reliance was placed

3
Transfer Pricing3
Section 142(1)2

M.M. PATEL PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,SOLAPUR vs. PCIT- CENTRAL, PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 1130/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Feb 2025
Section 12Section 127Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

section (3) of section 143 for any\nprevious year; or\nc) Such case has been selected in accordance with the risk\nmanagement strategy, formulated by the Board from time to\ntime, for any previous year;\nThe Principal Commissioner or Commissioner shall—\ni.\ncall for such documents or information from the trust\nor institution, or make such inquiry as he thinks

M/S. CITY CORPORATION LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

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

ITA 527/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora & Saukhya LakadeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 80I

property and construction of residential and commercial buildings. It filed its return of income on 29.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs.119,8,31,267/- after claiming deduction of Rs.1,02,32,288/- u/s 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). The case was selected for scrutiny and accordingly, statutory notices

M/S. CITY CORPORATION LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

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

ITA 528/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora & Saukhya LakadeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 133(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 80I

property and construction of residential and commercial buildings. It filed its return of income on 29.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs.119,8,31,267/- after claiming deduction of Rs.1,02,32,288/- u/s 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). The case was selected for scrutiny and accordingly, statutory notices

SUVARNA KIRAN CHAVAN,NASHIK vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, NASHIK

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

ITA 1785/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1785/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250

house property, income from business or profession etc. The assessee filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 05.11.2017 declaring income of Rs.43,40,100/- which was revised on same date declaring total income of Rs.31,75,740/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was 3 Suvarna Kiran

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX,CIRCLE-2,, NASHIK vs. SMT. CHHAYA VALMIK NIKHADE,LATE SHRI VALMIK R. NIKHADE, , NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1804/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 80I

housing projects, manufacturing and selling of transformers under the name and style of “PVN Transformers”. The assessee had expired on 06-05-2010. The return of income was filed by the legal heir, i.e. his wife by declaring total income of Rs.39,86,430/-. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had debited a sum of Rs.20

LATE SHRI WALMIK RAGHUNATH NIKHADE,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1743/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 80I

housing projects, manufacturing and selling of transformers under the name and style of “PVN Transformers”. The assessee had expired on 06-05-2010. The return of income was filed by the legal heir, i.e. his wife by declaring total income of Rs.39,86,430/-. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had debited a sum of Rs.20

RAGHULEELA BUILDERS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DICT, CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 1885/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1885/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Raghuleela Builders Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune. Ltd., 1401, A-Wing, One Bkc, Plot C-66, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai- 400051. Pan : Aadcr5942E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.10.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2011-12 Arises Against The Cit(A)-13, Pune’S Order Dated 22.07.2019 Passed In Case No. Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit Circle-1(2), Pune/623/2014-15/227, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”. Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. The Very Factual Position Had Existed On 30.05.2022 & 21.07.2022 As Well. We Thus Proceed Ex-Parte Against The Assessee.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

Properties Pvt 1 1103 99,473,835 Ltd AAACI2711H 2,369,578 1% 2,366,959 80, Girgaum Road, 1012 115,119,025 Opera Mouse, Mumbai- 400004 2 Samudra Lodha ABAPL8827B 816 936,846 84,936,288 1% 80 Girgaum Road, Opera 936,846 House, Mumbai-400004 3 AVK Auto Mart Pvt Ltd Laxmi Plaza,138, Link Road, Laxmi Indl

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

section 68 doesn't arise. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact of incorrect levy of interest 234B of the Act on the entire assessed income while calculating demand. 5. The appellant may kindly be permitted to add to or alter any of grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary

VISTEON ENGINEERING CENTER (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Accordingly, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 316/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ms. Nupoor ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)

section 234B of the Act, on account of the unanticipated transfer pricing adjustments. 13. Each one of the above grounds of appeal is without prejudice to the other. 14. The Appellant reserves the right to amend, alter or add to the grounds of appeal.” 4. Shri Ketan Ved appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that ground

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. VISTEON ENGG. CENTER (I) PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Accordingly, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 540/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ms. Nupoor ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 143(3)

section 234B of the Act, on account of the unanticipated transfer pricing adjustments. 13. Each one of the above grounds of appeal is without prejudice to the other. 14. The Appellant reserves the right to amend, alter or add to the grounds of appeal.” 4. Shri Ketan Ved appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that ground

REHAU POLYMERS PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. ASISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 519/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 519/Pun/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak
Section 143(3)

section 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the assessment year 2009-10. 2. The brief facts of the case as emanating from the record are: The assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing, distribution and marketing of polymer products and providing technical, sales and other services