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.

14 results for “house property”+ Section 253(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai442Karnataka437Delhi434Bangalore93Jaipur69Ahmedabad62Chennai50Chandigarh46Kolkata35Hyderabad33Indore31Telangana24Cuttack17Calcutta17Lucknow17Pune17Amritsar15Rajkot14Cochin10SC9Guwahati7Allahabad7Jodhpur6Surat5Rajasthan3Patna2Nagpur2Raipur2Agra2Varanasi1Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1Ranchi1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 80I40Section 8024Addition to Income11Section 119Deduction9Section 13(1)(c)8Section 153A6Section 12A3Section 142(1)3Section 13(3)

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 150/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 80Section 80I

Housing Tax, Central Circle-2, Vs Board, Kalawad Road, Rajkot Rajkot (Appellant) PAN: AABCB9255E (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 06-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 28-09-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- I.T.A Nos. 129 & 150/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 2 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT

BACKBONE ENTERPRISE LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

3
Charitable Trust3
Exemption3
ITA 129/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: Disposed
ITAT Rajkot
28 Sept 2022
AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 80Section 80I

Housing Tax, Central Circle-2, Vs Board, Kalawad Road, Rajkot Rajkot (Appellant) PAN: AABCB9255E (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 06-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 28-09-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- I.T.A Nos. 129 & 150/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 2 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 148/RJT/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 153ASection 80Section 80I

Housing Tax, Central Circle-2, Vs Board, Kalawad Road, Rajkot Rajkot (Appellant) PAN: AABCB9255E (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 06-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 28-09-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- I.T.A Nos. 127 & 148/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2009-10 Page No 2 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT

BACKBONE ENTERPRISE LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 127/RJT/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 153ASection 80Section 80I

Housing Tax, Central Circle-2, Vs Board, Kalawad Road, Rajkot Rajkot (Appellant) PAN: AABCB9255E (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 06-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 28-09-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- I.T.A Nos. 127 & 148/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2009-10 Page No 2 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 147/RJT/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 153ASection 80Section 80I

Housing Tax, Central Circle-2, Vs Board, Kalawad Road, Rajkot Rajkot (Appellant) PAN: AABCB9255E (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 06-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 28-09-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- I.T.A Nos. 126 & 147/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No 2 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT

BACKBONE ENTERPRISE LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 126/RJT/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 153ASection 80Section 80I

Housing Tax, Central Circle-2, Vs Board, Kalawad Road, Rajkot Rajkot (Appellant) PAN: AABCB9255E (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 06-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 28-09-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- I.T.A Nos. 126 & 147/Rjt/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No 2 Backbone Enterprise Ltd. vs. DCIT

THE ASSTT. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-2,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S BACKBONE ENTERPRISES LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 149/RJT/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 153ASection 80Section 80I

253 (Amritsar Tribunal) The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law in allowing relief to the assessee since post amendment all “works contracts” have been excluded from within the scope of eligibility of deduction u/s 80-IA(4) of the Act. The assessee is a works contractor and hence not eligible

BACKBONE ENTERPRISE LTD.,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 128/RJT/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-D.R
Section 153ASection 80Section 80I

253 (Amritsar Tribunal) The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law in allowing relief to the assessee since post amendment all “works contracts” have been excluded from within the scope of eligibility of deduction u/s 80-IA(4) of the Act. The assessee is a works contractor and hence not eligible

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI DEEPAK MOHANLAL PURSWANI, RAJKOT

ITA 665/RJT/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2026AY 2022-23
For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. SR. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

house property and business losses of Rs.\n52,358/-. Thus, total income of Rs.8,17,320/- has been offered. A Search, Seizure\nand Survey action was carried out by the office of DDIT (Inv.), Unit-1, Rajkot in\nthe case of leading real estate builders of Rajkot and their key associates on\n24.08.2021. Four different groups were covered

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. GYANGANGA EDUCATION SOCIETY,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 15/RJT/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 142(1)

4. Thus, the appeals filed by the assessee has been partly allowed by the ld.CIT(A). Aggrieved against the same, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The ld.CIT-DR, Mr.Aarsi Prasad appearing for the Revenue contended that the ld.CIT(A) has not considered the fact that calculation of rent per sq.feet is based on entire campus area

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. GYANGANGA EDUCATION SOCIETY,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 16/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 142(1)

4. Thus, the appeals filed by the assessee has been partly allowed by the ld.CIT(A). Aggrieved against the same, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The ld.CIT-DR, Mr.Aarsi Prasad appearing for the Revenue contended that the ld.CIT(A) has not considered the fact that calculation of rent per sq.feet is based on entire campus area

THE JT. CIT (EXEMPTIONS)(OSD), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. GYANGANGA EDUCATION SOCIETY,, RAJKOT

In the result, the Revenue appeal is hereby dismissed

ITA 369/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot28 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Us That This Similar Issue Is Being Adjudicated By The Very Same Bench Of This Tribunal In Assessee’S Own Case In Ita Nos. 15 & 16/Rjt/2015 Vide Order Dated 29.06.2022 Relating To The Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12. Further This Order Has Been Followed In Ita No. 472, 1170 & 2316/Ahd/2017 For The Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 By Order Dated 31.08.2022. Now The Present Assessment Year Is 2015-16, Which Is Fully Covered By The Above Orders Of This Tribunal & Copy Of The Orders Are Also Placed On Record.

For Appellant: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Desai, A.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

4. Thus, the appeals filed by the assessee has been partly allowed by the ld.CIT(A). Aggrieved against the same, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The ld.CIT-DR, Mr.Aarsi Prasad appearing for the Revenue contended that the ld.CIT(A) has not considered the fact that calculation of rent per sq.feet is based on entire campus area

THE ITO, WARD-2 (1) (4),, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S JAGJIT BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 137/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.137/Rjt/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2012-13) I.T.O, बनाम/ M/S Jagjit Builders & Ward-2(1), Developers, Vs. Rajkot. Ankur Apts., Dr. Floor, Aadarsh Society, B/H Ioc Bhavan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfj9480A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M.N. Maurya, Cit. D.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M.J. Ranpura, A.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 27/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 28/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Rajkot [Ld. Cit(A) In Short] Dated 25/02/2016, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Dated 27/02/2015 Relevant To Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2012-13. A.Y. 2012-13 The 1St Issue Raised By The Revenue Is That The Learned Cit (A) Erred In 2. Deleting The Addition Made By The Ao For Rs. 10,20,62,695/- On Account Of Unexplained Expenditure Under Section 69C Of The Act

For Appellant: Shri M.N. Maurya, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri M.J. Ranpura, A.R
Section 133ASection 69C

housing under the scheme. There was the survey operation at the business premises of the assessee under section 133A of the Act dated 29/09/2011. The assessee in the year under consideration has shown cost of construction in its balance sheet at Rs. 490/- per square feet whereas the AO was of the view that the construction cost should

SHRI BHAVISH HARILAL MORADIA,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD-1 (1) (3) , RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 63/RJT/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. N. Manvar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. L. Solanki, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153C

house from the impugned partnership firm. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the contention of the assessee and therefore, he made the addition to the total income of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that there was no material available with the Assessing