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.

4 results for “house property”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi603Mumbai522Jaipur230Bangalore189Hyderabad183Chennai143Chandigarh111Cochin102Ahmedabad87Indore76Pune71Rajkot62Nagpur60Amritsar48Kolkata38Raipur35Visakhapatnam35Surat35Lucknow28Guwahati27Agra26Patna17Jodhpur13Allahabad10Cuttack8SC4Jabalpur4Dehradun3Panaji2Varanasi2H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 158B7Section 69A5Section 6(1)3Section 23Section 6(2)2Section 1322

M/S D. N. SINGH THROUGH PARTNER DUDHESHWAR NATH SINGH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-003738-003739 - 2023Supreme Court16 May 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH

Section 260A

house property, lawfully otherwise, and falls short of ownership only for want of a formal conveyance as 72 required under Section 54 of Transfer of Property Act, a carrier who clings on to possession not only without having a shadow of a right, but what is more, both contrary to the contract as also the law cannot be found

INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ANR. vs. V.MOHAN AND ANR

C.A. No.-008592-008593 - 2010Supreme Court14 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR

Section 2Section 2(2)(c)Section 6
Section 6(1)
Section 6(2)

Investment   in   the   firm   of   M/s   V.P.V. Prema Jewellery, Kumbakonam.  ­do­ 4. Jewellery   disclosed   under   Voluntary Disclosure Scheme (i.e.) 518 gms of gold and 28 ets. of diamond.” ­do­ 9. The   Competent   Authority   after   giving   opportunity   to   the respondent(s)   eventually   passed   separate   forfeiture   order(s)   on 30.4.1998 against Smt. V. Padmavathy, respondent No.2 and on 28.5.1998 against V. Mohan

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

investment in the hands of the assessee under Section 69A of the Act? (ii) If the answer to the above question is in affirmative then, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in distinguishing the ratio laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of Piara

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S. CALCUTTA KNITWEARS, LUDHIANA

C.A. No.-003958-003958 - 2014Supreme Court12 Mar 2014
Section 132Section 158B

unexplained investment) and Rs.5,71,172/- (profit element)) by order dated 08.02.2008. The assessing officer is of the view that Section 158BE of the Act does not provide for any limitation for issuance of notice and completion of the assessment proceedings under Section 158BD of the Act and therefore a notice could be issued even after completion of the proceedings