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.

33 results for “house property”+ Section 293clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka435Delhi306Bangalore177Mumbai173Jaipur75Chennai51Hyderabad50Ahmedabad44Indore41Raipur35Kolkata34Pune33Amritsar31Chandigarh18Patna16Calcutta16Lucknow15Telangana12Surat6Jabalpur5Rajkot4Rajasthan3Agra3Visakhapatnam2Cochin2Cuttack2Jodhpur2Nagpur2SC2Panaji1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 17172Section 6844Addition to Income21House Property17Section 23(1)(a)16Section 153A11Section 13210Section 69C9Section 23(1)(c)8

M/S. GREAT FORTUNE INVESTMENTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, NASHIK

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2325/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Hon’Ble Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2325/Pun/2017 निर्ाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Great Fortune Investments & The Assistant Commissioner Of Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax, Shop No.6, Rushiraj Heights, Near Cirlce-1, Nashik. Nmc Water Tank, Parijat Nagar, Mahatma Nagar, Nahik. Pan: Aaccg 6406 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket M Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri S.P.Walimbe - Dr Date Of Hearing 10/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 08/04/2022

Section 23Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24

Section 23(1)(4) were applicable. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.13,40,763/- on account of deemed let out of house properties u/s 23(1)(a) of the Act and assessed the income of the appellant at Rs.1,33,49,293

Showing 1–20 of 33 · Page 1 of 2

Section 69A8
Deduction4
Disallowance4

SHREE GARUDA PLANT PRODUCTS LTD,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (2),, NASHIK

ITA 492/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.492/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shree Garuda Plant Products The Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Vs Ward-1(2), Nashik. B-26, Additional Midc Area, Ambad, Nashik. Pan: Aaacg 0563 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nishint Gandhi – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 20/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 14/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Nashik For The Assessment Year 2015-16, Dated 19.02.2019, Emanating Out Of Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1.In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 1, Nashik ["The Cit (A)" For Short] Erred In Confirming The Order Of The Learned Income Tax Officer - 1 (2), Nashik, ["The Ao" For Short] Which Was Passed In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice Without Affording A Proper Opportunity Of Being Heard To The Appellant. 2. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Invoking Section 14A R.W.R. 8D Of The Act, Whereby A Disallowance Of Rs.12,81,831/- Was Made In The Hands Of The Appellant.

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 2Section 2(22)(e)

House Property. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in making an addition of Rs.6,86,813/- to the rent income of Rs.10,18,051/- offered by the Appellant and treating the same as taxable income of the Appellant without appreciating the fact that certain amount of rent was unrealized and therefore

SUNIL RAMNARAYAN MANTRI,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1,JALGAON, JALGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 206-17

ITA 91/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

house property’. Accordingly, the Ld. AO completed the assessment for AY 2016- 17 on 26.12.2018 and for AY 2017-18 on 15.12.2019 on total income of Rs.2,15,53,035/- and Rs.96,15,704/- u/s 143(3) of the Act including therein the impugned addition of Rs.52,83,945/-, respectively. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before

SUNIL RAMNARAYAN MANTIR,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON, JALGAON

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 206-17

ITA 92/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

house property’. Accordingly, the Ld. AO completed the assessment for AY 2016- 17 on 26.12.2018 and for AY 2017-18 on 15.12.2019 on total income of Rs.2,15,53,035/- and Rs.96,15,704/- u/s 143(3) of the Act including therein the impugned addition of Rs.52,83,945/-, respectively. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI SHIVAJI BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,, PUNE

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

ITA 682/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 153A

house property. The Appellant has adopted the municipal valuation as the NAV, however, the learned AO stated that according to the law, as amended by the Finance Act, 2002, the Appellant’s case falls under section 23(1)(a) according to which, ALV should be the sum for which, the property might reasonable be expected to let from year

SHIVAJI BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

ITA 699/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 153A

house property. The Appellant has adopted the municipal valuation as the NAV, however, the learned AO stated that according to the law, as amended by the Finance Act, 2002, the Appellant’s case falls under section 23(1)(a) according to which, ALV should be the sum for which, the property might reasonable be expected to let from year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI SHIVAJI BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,, PUNE

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

ITA 681/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 680 To 682/Pun/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke & Shri Vikas AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 153A

house property. The Appellant has adopted the municipal valuation as the NAV, however, the learned AO stated that according to the law, as amended by the Finance Act, 2002, the Appellant’s case falls under section 23(1)(a) according to which, ALV should be the sum for which, the property might reasonable be expected to let from year

HINDUMAL BALMUKUND INVESTMENT CO.PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-1,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 562/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 562/Pun/2019 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Hindumal Balmukund Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd. 2Nd Floor, Lohia Jain House, Bhandarkar Road, Pune-411 004 Pan : Aaach4226Q .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Smt. Kesang V. Sherpa
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 4Section 80I

house property which was already considered under the head Income from Business and vice versa. As a sequel, the claim u/s 4 A.Y.2014-15 80IA(4) of Rs.7,64,02,294/- was corrected to Rs.4,44,39,344/- in the revised computation. 4. The AO, after considering the revised computation which reflected Gross Total Income at Rs.4

M N NAVALE BIGGER HUF,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 362/PUN/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

293 of the Act to the Instant suit or assessee. Accordingly, the grounds are decided pro- tanto.” Summation of proceedings: Therefore, essentially, what the Tribunal 9. did in the first round, as per the reasons recorded therein, that the existence of HUF with agricultural land holding of 60.40 acres is upheld. Secondly, regarding the quantification of said income, the Tribunal

M N NAVALE BIGGER HUF,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 363/PUN/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

293 of the Act to the Instant suit or assessee. Accordingly, the grounds are decided pro- tanto.” Summation of proceedings: Therefore, essentially, what the Tribunal 9. did in the first round, as per the reasons recorded therein, that the existence of HUF with agricultural land holding of 60.40 acres is upheld. Secondly, regarding the quantification of said income, the Tribunal

M N NAVALE BIGGER HUF,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 364/PUN/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

293 of the Act to the Instant suit or assessee. Accordingly, the grounds are decided pro- tanto.” Summation of proceedings: Therefore, essentially, what the Tribunal 9. did in the first round, as per the reasons recorded therein, that the existence of HUF with agricultural land holding of 60.40 acres is upheld. Secondly, regarding the quantification of said income, the Tribunal

M N NAVALE BIGGER HUF,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/PUN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

293 of the Act to the Instant suit or assessee. Accordingly, the grounds are decided pro- tanto.” Summation of proceedings: Therefore, essentially, what the Tribunal 9. did in the first round, as per the reasons recorded therein, that the existence of HUF with agricultural land holding of 60.40 acres is upheld. Secondly, regarding the quantification of said income, the Tribunal

MARUTI NIVRUTTI NAVALE, (SMALLER HUF),PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

293 of the Act to the Instant suit or assessee. Accordingly, the grounds are decided pro- tanto.” Summation of proceedings: Therefore, essentially, what the Tribunal 9. did in the first round, as per the reasons recorded therein, that the existence of HUF with agricultural land holding of 60.40 acres is upheld. Secondly, regarding the quantification of said income, the Tribunal

M N NAVALE BIGGER HUF,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 360/PUN/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

293 of the Act to the Instant suit or assessee. Accordingly, the grounds are decided pro- tanto.” Summation of proceedings: Therefore, essentially, what the Tribunal 9. did in the first round, as per the reasons recorded therein, that the existence of HUF with agricultural land holding of 60.40 acres is upheld. Secondly, regarding the quantification of said income, the Tribunal

M N NAVALE BIGGER HUF,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 365/PUN/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

293 of the Act to the Instant suit or assessee. Accordingly, the grounds are decided pro- tanto.” Summation of proceedings: Therefore, essentially, what the Tribunal 9. did in the first round, as per the reasons recorded therein, that the existence of HUF with agricultural land holding of 60.40 acres is upheld. Secondly, regarding the quantification of said income, the Tribunal

M N NAVALE BIGGER HUF,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 367/PUN/2017[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

293 of the Act to the Instant suit or assessee. Accordingly, the grounds are decided pro- tanto.” Summation of proceedings: Therefore, essentially, what the Tribunal 9. did in the first round, as per the reasons recorded therein, that the existence of HUF with agricultural land holding of 60.40 acres is upheld. Secondly, regarding the quantification of said income, the Tribunal

M N NAVALE BIGGER HUF,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 361/PUN/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

293 of the Act to the Instant suit or assessee. Accordingly, the grounds are decided pro- tanto.” Summation of proceedings: Therefore, essentially, what the Tribunal 9. did in the first round, as per the reasons recorded therein, that the existence of HUF with agricultural land holding of 60.40 acres is upheld. Secondly, regarding the quantification of said income, the Tribunal

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI DEVENDRA P. SHAH,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 795/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

293 agricultural income Income from -- 75,600 -- -- -- house property Cash payment to 10,00,000 -- -- -- -- Shrushti Sangam Assessed Income 3,97,46,150 3,20,49,181 2,78,75,690 2,95,00,657 1,66,66,843 3 Devendra P. Shah A.Yrs. 2007-08 to 2011-12 2.1 Referring to the additions made by the AO, giving

DEVENDRA P. SHAH,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY OMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 677/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

293 agricultural income Income from -- 75,600 -- -- -- house property Cash payment to 10,00,000 -- -- -- -- Shrushti Sangam Assessed Income 3,97,46,150 3,20,49,181 2,78,75,690 2,95,00,657 1,66,66,843 3 Devendra P. Shah A.Yrs. 2007-08 to 2011-12 2.1 Referring to the additions made by the AO, giving

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. SHRI DEVENDRA P. SHAH,, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 793/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 675 To 679/Pun/2016 िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Years : 2007-08 To 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri S.K, Jadhav
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

293 agricultural income Income from -- 75,600 -- -- -- house property Cash payment to 10,00,000 -- -- -- -- Shrushti Sangam Assessed Income 3,97,46,150 3,20,49,181 2,78,75,690 2,95,00,657 1,66,66,843 3 Devendra P. Shah A.Yrs. 2007-08 to 2011-12 2.1 Referring to the additions made by the AO, giving