Search: house property | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

5 results for “house property”+ Section 22clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,029 Delhi2,921 Bangalore1,038 Karnataka687 Chennai645 Jaipur545 Ahmedabad526 Hyderabad491 Kolkata478 Pune344 Chandigarh267 Indore243 Surat228 Visakhapatnam205 Cochin182 Telangana178 Amritsar123 Rajkot102 Raipur93 Lucknow83 Nagpur70 Cuttack66 Calcutta65 SC63 Agra42 Patna36 Guwahati32 Jodhpur26 Rajasthan21 Varanasi14 Dehradun13 Kerala12 Allahabad12 Orissa7 Jabalpur5 Ranchi5 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN3 Himachal Pradesh2 Andhra Pradesh2 Gauhati2 Punjab & Haryana2 ANIL R. DAVE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1 D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1 T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1 H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1 J&K1

Key Topics

Section 1485 Section 143(3)4 Section 543 Long Term Capital Gains3 Addition to Income3 Section 148A2 Section 54F2 Short Term Capital Gains2 Business Income

SRI ANAND KUMAR DHANUKA ,RANCHI vs. ITO WARD-1(1), RANCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 163/RAN/2018[11-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi31 Jul 2020

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.163/Ran/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Indrajit Singh, CIT DR

Section 10Section 22Section 263Section 54Section 54F

house property" or "ownership of property" as elaborated in sections 22 to 27 and 32 of the Income-tax Act, are very

2

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

Sections 4, 5, 15 (Salaries), 22 (Income from house property), 28 (Profits and gains of business), 45 (Capital gain) and 56 (Income

ASHOK BEHL,RANCHI vs. ITO,WARD-1(1), RANCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 78/RAN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Ashok Behl Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Ranchi 1St Floor, Samridhi Complex, South Office Para, Doranda, Ranchi – 834001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adwpb2438E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D. Sannigarh, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Mohanti, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

property i.e Flat No.702, 7th Floor , Vasundhara Elegance, Argora, Ranchi for consideration of Rs. 66, 00, 000/- which was acquired by the assessee on 30.05.2011 vide sale deed no. 12391 at cost of Rs. 20,21,200/-. The assessee had paid a sum of Rs.1,08,000/- as stamp duty and Rs.81,301/- as registration fee. The computation of capital

SUNITA ADUKIA,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIR-2, RANCHI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 15/RAN/2018[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Oct 2019

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Ranjan Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 54

houses for partners and its sale six years later due to the unhealthy conditions of the locality, could not constitute an adventure in the nature of trade, especially when the land is not ordinarily a commercial commodity. 1o At thus juncture, I also find it necessary to take cognizance of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

MISRILALL JAIN & SONS,SINGHBHUM WEST vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 468/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.468/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Misrilall Jain & Sons….…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant M. D. House, Chaibasa Singhbhum West, Jharkhand – 833201. [Pan: Aabfm2851Q] Vs. Acit, Cc-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 21, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 30.07.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 250

House, Chaibasa Singhbhum West, Jharkhand – 833201. [PAN: AABFM2851Q] vs. ACIT, CC-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : December 18, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : January 21, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This