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 100clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,360Mumbai1,317Karnataka520Bangalore481Jaipur296Ahmedabad290Hyderabad253Chennai236Kolkata188Chandigarh173Indore117Cochin115Telangana109Pune109Visakhapatnam67Calcutta53Raipur53Rajkot46Surat41Amritsar35Cuttack28Guwahati26Nagpur25SC25Lucknow24Patna19Rajasthan12Agra11Jodhpur11Varanasi7Panaji5Kerala4Dehradun3Orissa3Allahabad2Ranchi2Andhra Pradesh1Gauhati1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1Punjab & Haryana1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1

TATA CUMMINS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE-1-JAMSHEDPUR AND THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, NFAC, DELHI, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 430/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi12 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaytata Cummins Private Limited, D.C.I.T., Cummins India Office, Tower-A, 7Th Circle-1, Vs. Floor, Survey No. 21, Balewadi, Pune, Jamshedpur. Maharashtra. Pan No. Aaact 6353 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

100 kVA range. Thus, a single engine technological input was put to numerous uses through R&D efforts. 9.4 Subsequent periods saw rapid changes in environmental / emission norms putting a serious demand on R&D. By 2005, the Assessee's R&D was involved in adapting Base six cylinder 613 5.9 litres Euro I engine technology from Cummins

ITO WARD-2(1), JAMSHEDPUR vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BAJAJ, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 162/RAN/2017[09-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 Nov 2018

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010

For Appellant: Shri M.K.Choudhury/Manav Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT

100,00,000/- instead of Rs. 17,51,000/- as shown by assessee. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition merely because for cross examination the second party did not appear while all the evidence of transaction w provided to the assessee with sufficient opportunity of being