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 153C(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi601Mumbai361Bangalore297Chennai169Jaipur149Cochin126Hyderabad126Chandigarh60Amritsar52Ahmedabad47Visakhapatnam46Indore29Guwahati23Patna23Pune20Nagpur19Surat19Rajkot18Karnataka16Agra15Lucknow12Kolkata11Kerala7Raipur7Cuttack3Allahabad2Jodhpur2Telangana2Varanasi2Rajasthan1SC1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 153A2Section 153C2

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Sri Anand Prakash Sanghi

ITTA/33/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

For Appellant: M/S.HARBOUR VIEWFor Respondent: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 2(47)(v)Section 260ASection 269USection 53A

153C of the Act on 5.8.2004. The assessee filed a return on 27.12.2004 declaring 'nil' income, consequent to which notice was issued under Section 143(2) and assessment completed making an addition of Rs.1,87,00,000/- as being concealed income under 'short-term capital gain'. The assessee, which was a partnership firm and later registered as a Company, owns

The Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Jyothi Wines,

ITTA/226/2010HC Telangana30 Nov 2010

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

For Appellant: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXFor Respondent: M/S.CORDIAL COMPANY
Section 153ASection 153CSection 292C

1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the document recovered on search can be presumed to be true and correct under Section 292C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act for short)? (2) Has not the Tribunal committed an error insofar as putting the burden of proof on the Department? (3) Whether the first appellate