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.

2 results for “house property”+ Section 482clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka323Delhi182Mumbai97Bangalore92Ahmedabad79Chandigarh55Kolkata32Jaipur27Chennai23Lucknow16Hyderabad13Indore8Telangana8Varanasi4SC4Surat2Rajkot2Pune2Rajasthan1Agra1Andhra Pradesh1Nagpur1Dehradun1Orissa1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 153A4Section 1434Section 1324Section 1422Capital Gains2Undisclosed Income2Limitation/Time-bar2

ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR-1,, RAJKOT vs. RAJESHKUMAR GOVINDBHAI PATEL,, RAJKOT

In the result both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 25/RJT/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Apr 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 142Section 143Section 153A

482/- on account of peak balance of impugned foreign bank account. The Action of ld. CIT(A) in not deciding the ground of appeal on merit is unjustified. The AO may kindly be directed to delete the addition. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law in not deciding on merit, the ground of appeal related

ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CEN. CIR-1,, RAJKOT vs. RAJESHKUMAR GOVINDBHAI PATEL,, RAJKOT

In the result both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 26/RJT/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Apr 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 142Section 143Section 153A

482/- on account of peak balance of impugned foreign bank account. The Action of ld. CIT(A) in not deciding the ground of appeal on merit is unjustified. The AO may kindly be directed to delete the addition. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law in not deciding on merit, the ground of appeal related