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.

8 results for “house property”+ Section 274clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi267Mumbai162Bangalore105Jaipur85Chandigarh36Hyderabad31Ahmedabad30Chennai27Raipur19Indore13Lucknow12Cuttack11Kolkata10Pune10Surat8Rajkot7Cochin3SC3Visakhapatnam2Guwahati2Ranchi1Jodhpur1Varanasi1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Addition to Income7Section 271(1)(c)6Section 80I6Section 143(3)4House Property4Penalty4Section 41(1)3Section 2743Section 254(1)3Section 24

RAJESH C DALAL-HUF,SURAT vs. ADDL/JT/DEPUTY/ASST CIT/NATIONAL E- ASSESSMENT CENTER DELHI , DELHI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 249/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Rajesh C. Dalal-Huf, A.C.I.T., P-260, Old Gidc Estate, National E-Assessment Vs. Katargam, Surat-395004. Centre, Delhi. Pan: Aalhr 4363 J Appellant Respondednt

Section 24Section 254(1)Section 270A(1)Section 274

house property. The Assessing Officer at the time of passing the assessment order initiated penalty for misrepresentation of fact under Section 270A(1)r.w.s. 270(9)(a) of the Act. 3. The Assessing Officer before levying penalty, issued show cause notice under Section 274

JERAMBHAI BHAGVANBHAI GOHIL,VARACHHA, SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3)(2), SURAT

3
Section 56(2)(x)3
Disallowance2

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 53/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 54B

house. The Assessing Officer was of the view that for claiming deduction under section 54B, the assessee or his specified persons referred in Section 54B is required to carry out agricultural activities on the land sold as well as on newly purchased land. The Assessing Officer asked the 4 Jerambhai B Gohil assessee to substantiate such claim and noted that

SHRI FARSURAM RATILAL BHAMWALA,,BHARUCH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1935/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) & Ld. Cit(A) After Considering The Case Of Both The Parties Dismissed The Appeal Filed By The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Anupma Singla, Sr. D.R
Section 234BSection 274Section 41(1)

property purely on the basis of assumptions, surmises and conjectures. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of AO in charging interest u/s 234B of the Act. 4. The learned CIT(A.) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of AO in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s

ACIT, CIR-1(3), SURAT vs. PRAVIN PANNALAL SHAH, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 289/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.289/Srt/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Shri Pravin Pannalal Shah Lal Bunglow, Athwalines, Income-Tax, Circle-1(3, Vs. Surat-395007 Room No.301, 3Rd Floor, Anavil Business Centre, Hajira Road, Adajan, Surat-395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adrps 1045 H (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

house property’, income from ‘business and profession’ and income from ‘other sources’ comprising interest income. During the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer observed that assessee has purchased a property amounting to Rs.6,37,97,760/- during the assessment year under consideration. The source of the funds are mostly loans and gifts received by the assessee from various persons during

M/S. MAYUR CONSTRUCTION,,VALSAD vs. THE ACIT., VALSAD RANGE,, VALSAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1042/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Nov 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No. 1042/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mayur Construction, V The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Valsad. 110, Amar Chamber,Valsad. S [Pan: Aadfm 9859 L] . अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80I

properties. The assessee filed its Return of Income for A.Y. 2010- 11 on 27.09.2010 declaring income of Rs.1.08 crores. In the computation of income the assessee claimed deduction under section 80IB(10) of Rs.24,66,080/-. 3. A survey under section 133A was carried out at the business premises of assessee on 10.11.2009. During survey certain incriminating material

KANAIYALAL LABHUBHAI NAROLA,SURAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3,(2), SURAT, SURAT

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

ITA 816/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Aug 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

house property, income from partnership-firm and income\nfrom other sources during the year under consideration. The return was processed\nu/s 143(1) of the Act on 19.03.2013. Thereafter, the case was reopened u/s 147 of\nthe Act after recording the reasons by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on\n28.03.2019. As per the information received, a search

HEMANT NARESH AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR. 4, SURAT

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 170/SRT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआ.(खो और ज).सं /It(Ss)A No.68 & 70/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2018-19 (Physical Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Hemant Naresh Agarwal बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Vs. Surat Room No.508, 5Th Floor, Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Surat-395 010 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.170/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Hemant Naresh Agarwal Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Surat-395 010 Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Kiran K. Shah राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292CSection 69

section 69 of the Act. 11. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The assessee filed written submission before CIT(A) which is reproduced in para- 6.2 of the appellate order. The CIT(A) observed that the assessee had acquired 12 flats on dissolution of partnership firm M/s. Hans Devra Corporation against

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S DIANCO, , MUMBAI

ITA 222/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) A.C.I.T., M/S Dianco, Central Circle-4, C-210, Prasad Chambers, Opera Vs. Surat. House, Mumbai. Pan No. Aaafd 2501 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1)Section 56(2)(x)

House, Mumbai. PAN No. AAAFD 2501 R Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue Assessee represented by Shri Vartik Choksi, A.R. Department represented by Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-DR Date of hearing 31/07/2023 Date of pronouncement 03/08/2023 Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order