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.

3 results for “house property”+ Section 452clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka298Delhi221Mumbai129Ahmedabad42Jaipur37Bangalore25Hyderabad15Chandigarh13Lucknow12Chennai9Indore8Kolkata6Pune5Surat4Telangana4SC3Visakhapatnam1Andhra Pradesh1Calcutta1Gauhati1Jodhpur1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 144C6Section 69A5Section 1532Section 153(1)2Section 37(1)2

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX JAIPUR vs. PRAKASH CHAND LUNIA (D) THR LRS

C.A. No.-007689-007690 - 2022Supreme Court24 Apr 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

Section 104Section 112Section 135Section 271Section 69A

Section 10(2) enumerates various items which are admissible as deductions, but it is well settled that they are not exhaustive of all allowances which could be made in ascertaining profits taxable under s. 10(1). In Income Tax Commissioner v. Chitnavis [(1932) LR 59 IA 290, 296, 297] the point for decision was whether a bad debt could

RAJASTHAN STATE WAREHOUSING CORPN. vs. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed with costs

C.A. No.-004049-004049 - 1994
Supreme Court
23 Feb 2000
For Appellant: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the caseFor Respondent: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
Section 10(29)Section 256(1)Section 37Section 37(1)

452] and of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Punjab State Co-operative Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala-I [128 ITR 189] in support of his contention that the order of the High Court is unsustainable. The contention of Mr.K.N. Shukla, learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue, is that the expenditure which

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHELF DRILLING RON TAPPMEYER LIMITED

The appeals are allowed

C.A. No.-010586-010589 - 2025Supreme Court08 Aug 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

Section 144CSection 153Section 153(1)Section 44B

452 : (2006) 131 Comp Cas 451, that even if a non-obstante clause has wide amplitude, the extent of its impact has to be measured in view of the legislative intention and legislative policy. Further, the utility of non-obstante clause is where there is a conflict between what is stated in a provision and any other