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”+ Carry Forward of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,953Delhi787Kolkata368Karnataka276Bangalore240Chennai219Ahmedabad194Chandigarh182Jaipur170Pune100Raipur68Hyderabad66Cochin64Rajkot62Amritsar55Indore54Nagpur44Surat37Calcutta36Lucknow35Patna27Guwahati24SC21Telangana21Cuttack18Visakhapatnam16Jodhpur8Varanasi7Dehradun5Rajasthan3Panaji3Agra2Allahabad2Kerala2Andhra Pradesh1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Jabalpur1Himachal Pradesh1D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Addition to Income2

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MAHARAJA SHREE UMAID MILLS LTD

In the result, Appeal Suit is allowed and the impugned judgment and

ITA/83/2020HC Rajasthan07 May 2022

Bench: The Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court Reserved On : 28.02.2024 Pronounced On : 21.05.2024 Coram: The Honourable Mrs.Justice L.Victoria Gowri A.S.(Md)No.83 Of 2020 1.Jainambeevi 2.Sakkinam Begam 3.Mariam Beevi 4.Fathima Beevi 5.Sahul Hameed 6.Umar Habiba 7.Minor.Sirin Farhana

For Appellant: Mr.J.Barathan
Section 96

loss to the plaintiffs. During the pendency of this Suit on 30.11.2015, the 4th defendant sold certain portion of the suit properties to the 7th defendant for a valuable consideration of Rs.1,09,87,200/- (Rupees One Crore Nine Lakhs 6/85 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A.S.(MD)No.83 of 2020 Eighty Seven Thousand and Two Hundred only) eventhough

DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS)

ITA/7/2020HC Rajasthan
17 Mar 2021

Bench: SANGEET LODHA,RAMESHWAR VYAS

house of the legislature of the State, another statement showing the estimated amount of that expenditure or cause to be presented to the Legislative Assembly a demand for such excess as the case may be. Clause (1)(b) of Article 205 relates to amounts spent in excess of the amounts granted for a service for the financial year, and since

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SKYWAYS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COMPANY (P) LTD.

ITA/82/2020HC Rajasthan14 Feb 2022

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,SUDESH BANSAL

property. If a party is able to show ownership over the intellectual property, upon a request being made via the NPRD form, GoDaddy would be required to investigate and respond to the said request withing a period of 30 days. It is argued that the such methods adopted by GoDaddy show that it is exercising its powers in a Digitally