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.

8,173 results for “house property”+ Set Off of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,459Delhi1,670Bangalore674Chennai475Kolkata434Karnataka424Jaipur307Ahmedabad269Hyderabad222Chandigarh198Pune144Indore92Cochin86Rajkot75Raipur75Telangana72Surat57Amritsar52Lucknow48SC45Cuttack44Patna44Nagpur42Calcutta40Visakhapatnam31Guwahati25Agra15Jodhpur10Varanasi7Kerala7Dehradun5Allahabad4Panaji4Rajasthan4Jabalpur3Orissa2Ranchi1ARIJIT PASAYAT C.K. THAKKER1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Himachal Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1H.L. DATTU S.A. BOBDE1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)52Addition to Income44Section 26332Disallowance31Section 14829Deduction28Section 80I24Section 153A22Section 1119Section 147

SARITA SUNIL MANTRI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for stati...

ITA 2969/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sarita Sunil Mantri, Ito-7(2)(1), Flat 3 & 4, Kamal Building, Aayakar Bhavan, 69 Walkeshwar Road, Opp. Vs. Mumbai-400020. Gopi Birla School, Walkeshwar, Mumbai-400006. Pan No. Adxpm 8070 E Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Abhishek Jhunjhunwala, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Aditya Rai, Dr : Date Of Hearing 17/01/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 19/01/2023

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Abhishek Jhunjhunwala, AR
Section 23(4)Section 24Section 74(1)

Set-off of the eligible brought forward Long Term Capital Loss u/s.74(1) of eligible brought forward Long Term Capital Loss u/s.74(1) of eligible brought forward Long Term Capital Loss u/s.74(1) of Rs.36,37,562/ Rs.36,37,562/- and eligible brought forward loss from House and eligible brought forward loss from House Property

Showing 1–20 of 8,173 · Page 1 of 409

...
19
Section 143(2)16
Depreciation15

DURAISAMY SENTHIL KUMAR,ERODE vs. ITO, ERODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 552/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha.Gआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.552/Chny/2023 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Duraisamy Senthil Kumar Vs The Income Tax Officer, 16, Muthurangam Street, Erode. Erode-638 001. Pan: Alwps 8708C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCITFor Respondent: 13.09.2023
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 273B

set off of brought forward loss under the head ‘income from house property’ against income 6 from house property for the subsequent

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3398/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

house property, it is submitted\nthat the apprehension of the Ld. AO is factually incorrect. It is submitted\nthat the assessee has shown the actual rent received at Rs.3,87,56,614/-\nafter claiming deduction on account of Municipal Taxes, Interest on\nborrowed capital u/s 24(b),interest on Term Loan and interest paid on\nborrowed funds. Thereafter, it claimed

JAYABEN V. SHETH & OTHERS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 19 (2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by assessee is allowed

ITA 7219/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 7219 /मुं/2018 ("न.व.2015-16) M/S.Jayaben V Sheth & Others, 3, Ground Floor, Vincent View, Dr. B.A.Road, Dadar(E), Mumbai 400 014. : अपीलाथ"/ Appellant Pan:Aadfj4327Q बनाम/ Vs. The Acit 19(2), Matru Mandir, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 034 : ""थ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Phalgoon DesaiFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 23Section 23(1)(c)

House Property’ . The assessee claimed set- off of loss under the head ‘Income from House Property’ against ‘Income from Other

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1 , KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3395/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

house property, it is submitted\nthat the apprehension of the Ld. AO is factually incorrect. It is submitted\nthat the assessee has shown the actual rent received at Rs.3,87,56,614/-\nafter claiming deduction on account of Municipal Taxes, Interest on\nborrowed capital u/s 24(b),interest on Term Loan and interest paid on\nborrowed funds. Thereafter, it claimed

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3397/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

house property, it is submitted\nthat the apprehension of the Ld. AO is factually incorrect. It is submitted\nthat the assessee has shown the actual rent received at Rs.3,87,56,614/-\nafter claiming deduction on account of Municipal Taxes, Interest on\nborrowed capital u/s 24(b),interest on Term Loan and interest paid on\nborrowed funds. Thereafter, it claimed

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3396/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

house property, it is submitted\nthat the apprehension of the Ld. AO is factually incorrect. It is submitted\nthat the assessee has shown the actual rent received at Rs.3,87,56,614/-\nafter claiming deduction on account of Municipal Taxes, Interest on\nborrowed capital u/s 24(b),interest on Term Loan and interest paid on\nborrowed funds. Thereafter, it claimed

WADHWA & ASSOCIATES REALTORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 9(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 967/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri N. K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Wadhwa & Associates Asst. Commissioner Of Income Realtors Private Limited Tax 9(3) 301, 3Rd Floor, Platina, Mumbai. Plot C-59, G Block, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai - 400051 Pan:Aaacw5273G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Jitendra Jain, Advocate & Shri Mahesh O. Rajora, Ca Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Patankar Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2018 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Abhijit Patankar
Section 115JSection 44ASection 79

set off of brought forward house property losses of Rs.20,98,59,295/- against the current year’s house property

ASST CIT CC 8(4), MUMBAI vs. PHOENIX MILLS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 242/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 49/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 51/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 52/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 50/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 48/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 46/MUM/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

ASST CIT CC 8(4), MUMBAI vs. PHOENIX MILLS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 241/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

THE PHOENIX MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 47, MUMBAI

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 47/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

loss account a sum of Rs. 1,64,76,289 as Security charges. In the course of the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the detailed submission before the Ld. AO. And the Ld.A0 applied the proportion of 38.16% and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.62,87,352 as being proportionately related to income from house property. 105. We found that

ITO 5(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. CRIMSON PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2234/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Ravish Soodi.T.O. Ward-5(1)(3), Crimson Properties Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 569, 5Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Sunama House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Kemps Coner, Opp. Shalimar Hotel, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 036 Pan – Aaacc2206R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kapadia, A.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 24

set aside and the order of the A.O be restored. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground and/or add any other grounds which may be necessary.” 2. Briefly stated, the assessee company had filed its return of income for A.Y 2010-11 on 30.09.2010, declaring total income of Rs.12,34,630/-. The return of income was processed

D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S TURNER MORRISON LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as assessee both are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 297/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

loss is set off against the house property income and if it shows expenses incurred on earning of house property

SCHWAB EMERGING MARKETS EQUITY ETF ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 2134/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

house property,\nprofit and gains from business of profession, capital gains and income from\nother sources. Section 66 to 80 deals with the aggregation of income and set\noff /carry forward of loss