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 66(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,590Mumbai1,177Karnataka571Bangalore539Chennai266Jaipur249Hyderabad197Kolkata190Chandigarh182Ahmedabad171Surat159Pune82Telangana76Cochin72Raipur64Calcutta54Rajkot53Indore52Nagpur34Lucknow33SC28Guwahati24Visakhapatnam24Amritsar19Cuttack17Agra12Rajasthan11Jodhpur9Varanasi8Patna5Kerala4Orissa3Allahabad2Ranchi2Andhra Pradesh1Himachal Pradesh1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)4Section 2632Section 542Section 143(2)2Survey u/s 133A2

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

property D - Profits and gains of business or profession E - Capital gains F - Income from other sources 8.1. The income in the present case, if at all, is traceable to 'Capital gains' which is one of the heads of income. If by application of the provisions of Section 45 read with Section 48 which are integrally connected with each other

DR. SANJAY KUMAR,RANCHI vs. PR. CIT, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 29/RAN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

66 (SC) • CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd [2010] 189 Taxman 436 (Delhi HC) • CIT Vs Anil Kumar Sharma [2010] 194 Taxman 504 (Delhi HC) The ld AR also vehemently submitted before the bench that there were two house properties of the assesse shown by the assesse in the returno The ld AR therefore prayed before the bench that