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.

18 results for “house property”+ Section 43Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai271Delhi171Chennai93Kolkata61Bangalore60Raipur37Pune18Jaipur16Hyderabad14Lucknow12Ahmedabad9Nagpur8Karnataka5Visakhapatnam3Chandigarh3SC3Surat2Dehradun2Telangana1Calcutta1Cuttack1Indore1Jodhpur1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 43B16Disallowance15Section 14A13Section 139(1)12Section 36(1)(va)9Section 143(1)8Section 143(3)8Section 80P(2)(a)8Addition to Income8Section 263

VINAYAK HANUMANTRAO GHORPADE,PUNE vs. VAISHNAVI SATISH BANKAR, PUNE

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 1438/PUN/2024[AY2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Dec 2025

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.1438 & 1439/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21 Vinayak Hanumantrao V Vaishnavi Satish Bankar, Ghorpade, S. Pune. F.No.7, Plot No.60/61, S.No.165/1B, Shivanjali, Near Central Circle-1(3), Pune. Mahadev Temple, Indira Nagar, Pune – 411033. Pan: Afdpg6919A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod S Shingte Revenue By Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar –Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Pune-11 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2019-20 & 2020-21, Both Dated 02.05.2024 Emanating From Separate Assessment Order U/S.153A R.W.S 144 Of The I.T.Act, Both Dated 23.09.2021.For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals

Section 153ASection 250Section 43BSection 68Section 80C

section 80C of IT ACT, 1961, being the principal amount repaid on housing loan without appreciating the facts of the case and further rejecting the appellant’s contention that copy of loan account statement wherein the principal repayment is clearly reflected, should be sufficient compliance of the supporting documents called for. Your appellant prays to allowance of such deduction

7
Deduction6
Natural Justice5

VINAYAK HANUMANTRAO GHORPADE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 1439/PUN/2024[AY2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Dec 2025

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.1438 & 1439/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21 Vinayak Hanumantrao V Vaishnavi Satish Bankar, Ghorpade, S. Pune. F.No.7, Plot No.60/61, S.No.165/1B, Shivanjali, Near Central Circle-1(3), Pune. Mahadev Temple, Indira Nagar, Pune – 411033. Pan: Afdpg6919A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod S Shingte Revenue By Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar –Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal), Pune-11 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2019-20 & 2020-21, Both Dated 02.05.2024 Emanating From Separate Assessment Order U/S.153A R.W.S 144 Of The I.T.Act, Both Dated 23.09.2021.For The Sake Of Convenience, These Two Appeals

Section 153ASection 250Section 43BSection 68Section 80C

section 80C of IT ACT, 1961, being the principal amount repaid on housing loan without appreciating the facts of the case and further rejecting the appellant’s contention that copy of loan account statement wherein the principal repayment is clearly reflected, should be sufficient compliance of the supporting documents called for. Your appellant prays to allowance of such deduction

SIDDHESHWAR INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 760/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.760/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Siddheshwar Industries Pvt. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- Ltd., 2(2), Pune. Plot No.A-50, H- Block, Midc, Pimpri, Pune- 411018. Pan : Aagcs4976E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Hari Krishan Revenue By : Shri Piyushkumar Singh Yadav Date Of Hearing 09.03.2022 : Date Of Pronouncement : 20.04.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Pune [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 23.10.2015 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned C.I.T. [A] 12 Has Erred By Wrongly Enhance The Amount Of Rs.2,95,00,000/- By Disallowing The Claim Of Deduction U/S 43B In Revised Return Of Income Filed U/S 153A Of The I T Act. The Aforesaid Addition Being Arbitrary, Perverse, Based On Surmises & Conjecture

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri Piyushkumar Singh Yadav
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234Section 43B

section 43B was made on the basis of payment Rs.2,95,00,000/- relating to disallowance of statutory dues u/s 43B for assessment year 2006-07 stated to have been offered to tax in the return of income in response to notice u/s 153A of the Act. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed

M/S KIRAN SANRAN ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 791/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Naveen RanderFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 43C

property as on the date of transfer, (b) the value so adopted or assessed or assessable by the stamp valuation authority under sub-section (1) has not been disputed in any appeal or revision or no reference has been made before any other authority, court or the High Court, the Assessing Officer may refer the valuation of the capital asset

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)

43B disallowance, TDS claim vis- à-vis income offered to tax u/s.199(1) and deemed rent issue with 4 ITA.No.855/PUN/2019 Shri Bharat Keshavlal Shah, Pune. liberty to raise appropriate contentions before the Assessing Officer in consequential proceedings. Rejected in very terms. 7. This leaves us with the first and foremost issue of PCIT's revision directions regarding the applicability

SMT. ROHINI VALMIK GADHAVE,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -5, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 433/PUN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt. Rohini Valmik Gadhave Vs. Pr.Cit-5, Pune C-Wing, Flat No.603, Mantra Properties, Moshi, Pune – 412105 Pan : Bkvpg9947G Appellant Respondent

Section 142(1)Section 263

43B of the Act from 01-04-1984 came up for consideration in Allied Motors Private Limited v. CIT (1997) 91 taxman 205(SC) before Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was given retrospective effect from the inception of the section on the reasoning that the proviso was added to remedy unintended consequences and supply an obvious omission so that

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

section 43B of the Act. The Assessing Officer also brought to tax notional annual value of flats unsold of Rs.1,05,000/- under the head “Income from house property

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

section 43B of the Act. The Assessing Officer also brought to tax notional annual value of flats unsold of Rs.1,05,000/- under the head “Income from house property

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

section 43B of the Act. The Assessing Officer also brought to tax notional annual value of flats unsold of Rs.1,05,000/- under the head “Income from house property

SANJEEVANI CRITICARE AND RESEARCH CENTRE P LTD,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALUR, BENGALURU

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

ITA 548/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Anil Maheshwari – (Sl. No.1)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Properties, ADIT, CPC, 2019-20 Office No.2, Shraddha Bangalore. Empire, First Floor, 26, Railway Lines, Solapur- 413001. PAN : ABIFS1356G 3 548/PUN/2021 Sanjeevani Criticare and DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 Research Centre P. Ltd., Bangalore. Plot No.3, 1st Floor, Narayan Sankul, Near Mahalaxmi Talkies, Dindori Road, Panchavati, Nashik- 422003. PAN : AAICS9205L 4-5 549/PUN/2021 Yogesh Vitthaldas Rathi, DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 550/PUN/2021

YOGESH VITTHALDAS RATHI,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, , BENGALURU

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

ITA 549/PUN/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Anil Maheshwari – (Sl. No.1)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Properties, ADIT, CPC, 2019-20 Office No.2, Shraddha Bangalore. Empire, First Floor, 26, Railway Lines, Solapur- 413001. PAN : ABIFS1356G 3 548/PUN/2021 Sanjeevani Criticare and DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 Research Centre P. Ltd., Bangalore. Plot No.3, 1st Floor, Narayan Sankul, Near Mahalaxmi Talkies, Dindori Road, Panchavati, Nashik- 422003. PAN : AAICS9205L 4-5 549/PUN/2021 Yogesh Vitthaldas Rathi, DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 550/PUN/2021

YOGESH VITTHALDAS RATHI,NASHIK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, , BENGALURU

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

ITA 550/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Anil Maheshwari – (Sl. No.1)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Properties, ADIT, CPC, 2019-20 Office No.2, Shraddha Bangalore. Empire, First Floor, 26, Railway Lines, Solapur- 413001. PAN : ABIFS1356G 3 548/PUN/2021 Sanjeevani Criticare and DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 Research Centre P. Ltd., Bangalore. Plot No.3, 1st Floor, Narayan Sankul, Near Mahalaxmi Talkies, Dindori Road, Panchavati, Nashik- 422003. PAN : AAICS9205L 4-5 549/PUN/2021 Yogesh Vitthaldas Rathi, DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 550/PUN/2021

SIP MOULDS PRIVATE LIMITED,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), NAHSIK

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

ITA 551/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Anil Maheshwari – (Sl. No.1)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Properties, ADIT, CPC, 2019-20 Office No.2, Shraddha Bangalore. Empire, First Floor, 26, Railway Lines, Solapur- 413001. PAN : ABIFS1356G 3 548/PUN/2021 Sanjeevani Criticare and DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 Research Centre P. Ltd., Bangalore. Plot No.3, 1st Floor, Narayan Sankul, Near Mahalaxmi Talkies, Dindori Road, Panchavati, Nashik- 422003. PAN : AAICS9205L 4-5 549/PUN/2021 Yogesh Vitthaldas Rathi, DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 550/PUN/2021

TILOKCHAND BHABUTMAL SHAH,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, , BANGALORE

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

ITA 538/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Anil Maheshwari – (Sl. No.1)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Properties, ADIT, CPC, 2019-20 Office No.2, Shraddha Bangalore. Empire, First Floor, 26, Railway Lines, Solapur- 413001. PAN : ABIFS1356G 3 548/PUN/2021 Sanjeevani Criticare and DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 Research Centre P. Ltd., Bangalore. Plot No.3, 1st Floor, Narayan Sankul, Near Mahalaxmi Talkies, Dindori Road, Panchavati, Nashik- 422003. PAN : AAICS9205L 4-5 549/PUN/2021 Yogesh Vitthaldas Rathi, DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 550/PUN/2021

M/S SHRADDHA PROPERTIES,SOLAPUR vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC,, BANGALORE

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

ITA 539/PUN/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Anil Maheshwari – (Sl. No.1)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

Properties, ADIT, CPC, 2019-20 Office No.2, Shraddha Bangalore. Empire, First Floor, 26, Railway Lines, Solapur- 413001. PAN : ABIFS1356G 3 548/PUN/2021 Sanjeevani Criticare and DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 Research Centre P. Ltd., Bangalore. Plot No.3, 1st Floor, Narayan Sankul, Near Mahalaxmi Talkies, Dindori Road, Panchavati, Nashik- 422003. PAN : AAICS9205L 4-5 549/PUN/2021 Yogesh Vitthaldas Rathi, DCIT, CPC, 2018-19 550/PUN/2021

SHARADA ELECTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. PCIT, PUNE-3, PUNE

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

ITA 1432/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 263

43B of the Act, the said deduction is allowable when it is actually paid by the assessee on or before the due date applicable in its case for furnishing the return of income under sub section 1 of section 139 in respect of the previous year in which liability to pay such sum was incurred. Further, in the instant case

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), PUNE, PUNE vs. PARSHWANATH NAGARI SAHAKARI PARSANSTHA MARYADIT, SATARA

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1314/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri B.C. MalakarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

House Property. 3.3. The Assessing Officer relied on various decisions and observed that the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case has not been accepted and appeal has already been filed by the Revenue before the Hon’ble jurisdictional Bombay High Court which is pending on date. The Assessing Officer, 5 ITA.No.1314/PUN./2024 therefore, denied the claim

AICON,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE-7, PUNE

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 1875/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Alcon Vs. Dcit, Circle 7, 4Th Floor, Metropole, Pune Bund Garden Road, Near Inox Theatre, Pune – 411001 Pan : Aaifa1665R Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 43BSection 70Section 80I

housing projects u/s.80IB(10) which were completed prior to the year under assessment without appreciating that the said deduction is allowable on payment basis u/s.43B and the inter source set off has to be allowed u/s. Section 70 before considering deductions under chapter VI-A. It is submitted that no disallowance was justified and the same may kindly be deleted