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.

3 results for “house property”+ Section 13(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,071Delhi2,840Bangalore1,095Karnataka683Chennai613Kolkata494Jaipur465Ahmedabad343Hyderabad321Chandigarh248Surat223Pune205Telangana169Indore133Cochin103Amritsar97Rajkot84Raipur80Lucknow77SC66Nagpur62Calcutta61Visakhapatnam53Cuttack46Patna29Guwahati26Agra24Rajasthan17Jodhpur16Varanasi15Kerala13Dehradun12Allahabad11Orissa8A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN4Ranchi4Panaji3Punjab & Haryana3Andhra Pradesh2Gauhati2H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1Himachal Pradesh1J&K1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 262Section 112Addition to Income2

M/S PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, GARHA ROAD , JALANDHAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JALANDHAR AND ANR

ITA/271/2014HC Punjab & Haryana04 Dec 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Section 11

property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes during the previous year in which such services are so provided and shall be chargeable to income- tax notwithstanding the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 11. Explanation. For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression "value" shall be the value of any benefit or facility granted

RANJIT SINGH GHUMAN vs. C I T

ITA/216/2007HC Punjab & Haryana17 May 2024

Bench: The Revenue Authorities That A Sum Of ` 5,00,000/- Was Still Due To Be Paid & Varinder Singh 2024.05.21 13:43 I Attest To The Accuracy & Authencity Of This Order/Judgment

Section 158

Section 158 BC (c) on 26.02.2002 by the CIT, Jalandhar and while making other VARINDER SINGH 2024.05.21 13:43 I attest to the accuracy and authencity of this order/judgment ITA No. 216 of 2007 -3- additions, ` 5,00,000/- have been added as undisclosed investment made to acquire the rights of his sister-in-law in the family property. Total

M/S Y.S. AND CO-OWNERS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ETC.

ITA/20/2008HC Punjab & Haryana09 Sept 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Section 144Section 167B(2)(i)Section 2Section 26

house property. The Revenue challenged the or he appellant also filed cross objec ted 25.05.2007 held the incom he AOP. However, the submi -2- Thus, the income tax authority f rent received by co-owners as tions stating that income from s per their specified shares and Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’). the objections and passed the Act making