KALINGA INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL SCINCES(KISS),PATIA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION)- HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had adequately examined the issue of corpus donations during the assessment proceedings. The CIT(E) failed to verify the additional information provided by the assessee in response to the show cause notice.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a trust registered under sections 12A and 80G, received corpus donations. The CIT(E) invoked revisionary powers under Section 263, setting aside the assessment order for inadequate verification of these donations.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(E) was justified in invoking Section 263 powers for alleged inadequate verification of corpus donations when the AO had already examined the issue.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 12A,Section 80G,Section 244A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Pr. CIT v. Orissa State Police Housing & Welfare Corporation Ltd.18 citing139 Taxmann.com 207 · 2022 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA
O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld.CIT(E), Hyderabad at Bhubaneswar, dated 14.03.2022, passed in DIN & Order No.ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2021-22/1040706357(1) for the assessment year 2017-2018.
It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is a trust, who is enjoying the benefit of registration u/s.12A & 80G of the Act. It was submitted that the assessee had received corpus donations from M/s Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology (KIIT) in the form of incurrence of capital expenditure of Rs.21,65,00,000/- and an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- from Container Corporation of India (CCI). It was submitted that as per the MOU between the assessee and Container Corporation of India, the Container Corporation of India has provided Rs.25 lakhs corpus donation to the assessee for the purpose of setting up of tailoring unit for teaching tailoring to backward tribal girls in Orissa. The assessment in the case of the assessee had been completed and the AO had examined the issue of the corpus donations received from the Container Corporation of India and also from M/s KIIT. It was the submission that corpus donations of M/s KIIT was in the form of the construction of an educational building and the purchase of electronic equipments. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(E) issued the show cause notice on 18.01.2022 on the ground that the AO has not done proper verification of the said corpus donations received by the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee had replied to the ld. CIT(E) and had also provided the copy of the MOU between the assessee and the Container Corporation of India along with the details of the building constructed by M/s KIIT for the assessee. It was also submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee submitted before the ld. CIT(E) that even if the two corpus donations are treated as the income of the assessee, still the taxable income would be a negative figure and, therefore, there could be no prejudice to the interest of revenue. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(E) without considering the explanation of the assessee had invoked his powers u/s.263 of the Act and set aside the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act on the issue of the verification of the corpus donations. It was further submitted that in page 6 of the order of the ld. CIT(E) passed u/s.263 of the Act, the ld.CIT(E) has held that the AO has wrongly charged interest u/s.244A of the Act and has directed the AO to
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026