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.

90 results for “house property”+ Section 43Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka47Telangana15Mumbai11Delhi8Kolkata3Bangalore3Jaipur1SC1Chennai1

Key Topics

Section 26051Depreciation50Charitable Trust48Section 1147Section 3246Exemption41Carry Forward of Losses36Deduction34Section 143(3)32Addition to Income

ACIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. MAX NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1768/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri M.S. Syali, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT, DR

43C; while drafting section 44A, it saved the prescription of this section alone and made futile all provisions of the Act; and while drafting section 44, it rendered useless only the provisions relating to the computation of income chargeable under the head "Interest on securities", "Income from house property

PRADEEP WIG,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-5, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 406/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi

Showing 1–20 of 90 · Page 1 of 5

32
Disallowance28
Set Off of Losses28
29 Apr 2025
AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

house or flat) and owned by a ‘non- natural person’ (NNP). A non-natural person is a corporate entity, such as a company, limited liability partnership, trust or investment scheme. To be classed as a dwelling, the property must be: • Used exclusively or in part as a residence • In the process of being adapted or constructed as a residence

ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI vs. THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2130/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ms. Akshaya IyerFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati
Section 234DSection 250Section 41(1)

43C of the Act. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on 30/09/2008 declaring a total income of Rs. 245,70,05,370. The return filed by the assessee was initially processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, the return of income was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under section

THE SHIPPING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL.C.I.T. LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2550/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ms. Akshaya IyerFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati
Section 234DSection 250Section 41(1)

43C of the Act. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on 30/09/2008 declaring a total income of Rs. 245,70,05,370. The return filed by the assessee was initially processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, the return of income was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under section

DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 4103/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2019-20
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 41(1)

house property at Kolkata was\nvalued Rs 11,55,19,784/- by stamp value authorities.The valuation report\nclearly showed that the property was old since it was purchased in 1996\nand heavy repairs were needed.The assessee proposed to make a distress\nsale at lesser value of Rs 7 cr. to one Deepak Builder P.Ltd.The property\nconsisted of 32 flats. Copy

MR. BHASKAR JOSEPH,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 6(2)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1737/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri Rajeev Nulvi, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, A.R., Standing counsel for Revenue
Section 131Section 68

43C, in the case of an eligible assessee engaged in an eligible business, a sum equal to eight per cent of the total turnover or gross receipts of the assessee in the previous year on account of such business or, as the case may be, a sum higher than the aforesaid sum claimed to have been earned by the eligible

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(2)(2), ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPT, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3754/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: \nShri Madhur Agrawal a/w Shri Bhargav ParekhFor Respondent: \nShri Biswanath Das (CIT DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 41(1)

house property at Kolkata was\nvalued Rs 11,55,19,784/- by stamp value authorities.The valuation report\nclearly showed that the property was old since it was purchased in 1996\nand heavy repairs were needed.The assessee proposed to make a distress\nsale at lesser value of Rs 7 cr. to one Deepak Builder P.Ltd.The property\nconsisted of 32 flats. Copy

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI vs. TRANS ASIAN SHIPPING SERVICES (P) LTD

C.A. No.-005869-005869 - 2016Supreme Court05 Jul 2016
Section 115VSection 14Section 2(17)

House Property; (iii) Profits and Gains of Business or Profession; (iv) Capital Gains and (v) Income from Other Sources. Thereafter, manner of computation of the income under the aforesaid heads is stipulated in various sections falling under Chapter IV. As far as Income from Profits and Gains of Business or Profession is concerned, Sections 28 to 44DB

COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. MANIPAL HOTEL & RESTAURANT

ITA/201/2015HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 12ASection 260Section 32

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. DR T.M.A. PAI FOUNDATION

ITA/243/2010HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 260Section 32

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the Date of Judgment

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. THE KARNATAKA STATE

ITA/106/2016HC Karnataka27 Sept 2018

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S.G.PANDIT

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260

43C. That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION

ITA/317/2014HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 32Section 35

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a Date of Judgment 14-08-2018 I.T.A.No.317/2014 Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) & Another Vs. M/s International Institute

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. SHUSHRUTHA EDUCATIONAL

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/862/2017HC Karnataka21 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S THE BANGALORE

ITA/709/2015HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 14Section 15Section 260

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. DAUGHTERS OF ST.MARY OF PROVIDENCE SOCIETY

ITA/325/2018HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 260Section 32

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation

COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S RASTHROTHANA

ITA/168/2016HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 14Section 15Section 260Section 32

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S CHALASSANI EDUCATION TRUST

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/852/2017HC Karnataka21 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 32

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter Date of Order 21-08-2018 I.T.A.No.852/2017 Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) & Anr. Vs. M/s.Chalassani Education Trust 9/27 also

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. G. M. EDUCATION TRUST

ITA/1046/2017HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 260Section 268ASection 32

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S RASTHROTHANA PARISHAT

ITA/167/2016HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 14Section 260Section 32

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation

THE COMMISSIONER vs. JYOTHY CHARITABLE TRUST

ITA/707/2015HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 14Section 15Section 260Section 32

43C, That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation