Search: house property | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

9 results for “house property”+ Section 233clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi529 Karnataka443 Mumbai243 Bangalore132 Cochin61 Chennai57 Ahmedabad37 Kolkata35 Raipur30 Jaipur28 Indore19 Lucknow18 Hyderabad17 Calcutta17 Surat12 Pune9 Nagpur7 Amritsar7 Patna7 Visakhapatnam6 Telangana6 Guwahati5 Rajasthan5 Rajkot5 Chandigarh5 Jabalpur4 SC3 Varanasi1 Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 14A13 Section 56(2)(vii)7 Section 143(3)6 Section 36(1)(iii)6 Addition to Income6 Disallowance5 Section 143(2)4 Section 43B4 Section 13

BHARAT KESHAVLAL SHAH,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -3,, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 855/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 199Section 199(1)Section 23Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 43BSection 56(2)(vii)

Natural Justice3

233 onwards. Mr. Khandelwal’s case, therefore, is that the assessing authority had duly applied its mind during the course of scrutiny, and, therefore, the assessment framed in assessee’s case has been wrongly held to be an erroneous one causing prejudice to interest of the Revenue. All these assessee’s arguments fail to evoke our acceptance since

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, PANVEL vs. PRAMOD ARJUN THAKUR,, RAIGAD

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 860/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.860/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)

house property, capital gains and other sources. The return of income for the year under appeal was filed by the appellant on 31.03.2017, declaring therein total income of Rs.7,78,000/-. Addition of Rs.6,54,61,100/- was made by the Id AO by relying upon the provisions of section

JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE 14, PUNE vs. KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

ITA 20/PUN/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

house property”. 7. Being aggrieved by the order of assessment, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order allowed the issue relating to the disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act, considering the submissions made before him that interest free funds as well as surplus reserve funds far exceeds the loans

JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE 14, PUNE vs. KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

ITA 21/PUN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

house property”. 7. Being aggrieved by the order of assessment, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order allowed the issue relating to the disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act, considering the submissions made before him that interest free funds as well as surplus reserve funds far exceeds the loans

JCIT (OSD), CIRCLE 14, PUNE vs. KUMAR BUILDER MUMBAI REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

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

ITA 22/PUN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

house property”. 7. Being aggrieved by the order of assessment, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order allowed the issue relating to the disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act, considering the submissions made before him that interest free funds as well as surplus reserve funds far exceeds the loans

ASHOK NARAYAN BHOSALE,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1501/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1501/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ashok Narayan Bhosale, The Deputy Commissioner Of Ashok Narayan Bhosle Bunglow At Vs Income Tax, Kaveri Nagar, Pratham Housing Cirlce-8, Pune. Society, Wakad, Pune – 411057. Pan: Aaspb 3588 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri S.P.Walimbe - Dr Date Of Hearing 10/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14/03/2022

Section 1Section 10Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 32

House Property. 3. None appeared on behalf of the appellant. However, the appellant had filed written submission on 19/07/2021. The appellant has mentioned as under: Quote “Considering the judgment passed by Honorable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench B (ITA No.2789/Mum/2012) AY 2009-10, in the case of Mitc Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., additional depreciation on machineries purchased after 30th September

PUNE MATHADI HAMAL AND OTHER MANUAL WORKERS BOARD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1012/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1012/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pune Mathadihamal & Other The Income Tax Manual Workers Board, V Officer, Shramashakti Bhavan, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Coomercial Plot No.1, Market Yard, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aaalp0097L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vipul Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Shri Rajesh Gawali– Dr’S Date Of Hearing 17/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Orders Of Ld.Commissionerof Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Act Dated 14.07.2023 :

For Appellant: 2. The ld.AR submitted written submissions, relevant part of the same is reprodu

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

housing for the workers, providing scholarships to the wards of the workers, providing full fledge Hospitalisation facility and free medical treatment to the workers etc. The mathadi boards do not carry on any activity for profit. The primary object is to protect the poor manual workers from exploitation by ensuring full wages, labour law benefits, ensuring full utilization of work

ANIL HANUMANT CHOUDHARI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(3) PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 406/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri B.R. BarveFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 251Section 54F

233/- whereas Rs. Rs. 9,58,110/- was claimed in ITR filed vide acknowledgement No. 329297250310321. (b) Again, assessee has claimed Capital gain deduction of Rs.98,88,710/- (Rs. 76,91,783/- Rs.21,96,927/-) u/s.54F on investment of another immovable property. Again, as per reply furnished on 19/02/2022, assessee has claimed the deduction of Rs.84,63,000/- on Stamp

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1)PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 725/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ratan SamalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)

houses of the managing director and other directors. In such a case, when the managing director or any other persons were found to be not in possession of any incriminating material, the question of examining them by the authorised officer during the course of search and recording any statement from them by invoking the powers under section