TANAJI BABURAO BHOSALE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 10(1), PUNE, PUNE
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a revised return claiming a lower income due to excess deduction under Section 10. The Assessing Officer denied exemption under Section 10(10C) and made additions for bank interest and house property loss. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, sustaining some of the AO's additions.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order on the disputed issues and restored them to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted an opportunity to present information and be heard.
What were the issues?
Whether the denial of exemption under Section 10(10C) and the addition of bank interest by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A) were justified, considering the assessee's VRS compensation and arrears of salary.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 10(10C),Section 89(1),Section 142(1),Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE
Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE
PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of NFAC/CIT(A), Delhi passed u/sec 250 of the Income Tax Act . The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) appeal sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer.
At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that there is a delay of 131 days in filing the appeal before Hon'ble Tribunal and the assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay. On consideration of facts and information mentioned in ITA.No.1784/PUN/2026 Tanaji Baburao Bh
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 10(10C)
- Preeti Dubey, Jhansi vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(5), JhansiITA 439/AGR/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Preeti Dubey, Jhansi vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(5), JhansiITA 438/AGR/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Preeti Dubey, Jhansi vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(5), JhansiITA 439/AGR/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Preeti Dubey, Jhansi vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(5), JhansiITA 438/AGR/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Makarand Prabhakar Abhyankar, Mumbai vs ITO, Circle 1, KolhapurITA 1497/PUN/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2021-2022
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Rajesh Kumar Shaw vs. Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ballygunge Charge And OrsCalcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreya Steel Corporation vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Revenue, Bally And Salkia Charge And OrsCalcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreya Steel Corporation vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Revenue, Bally And Salkia Charge And OrsCalcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- Samir Halder vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Shaw vs. Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Ballygunge Charge And OrsCalcutta · 6 Oct 2026