DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issues to the AO. This was to allow the AO to re-examine the matters afresh, considering the assessee's eligibility for exemption under Section 11.
What were the facts?
The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which was against an AO's rectification order. The AO had initially denied exemption under Section 11 of the Act, but the ITAT later held the assessee eligible for this exemption.
What were the issues?
Whether the issues contested before the tribunal needed to be set aside to the AO for fresh examination in light of the ITAT's prior ruling on Section 11 exemption.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C’’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI N.V VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDNET & SHRI B.R BASKARAN
O R D E R Per B.R Baskaran, Accountant Member
The revenue has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 20-04-2015 passed by Ld CIT(A)-14, Bangalore and it relates to the assessment year 2010-11.
At the outset, it was noticed that the impugned order passed by Ld CIT(A) was against the rectification order passed by the AO u/s 154 of the Act. It was noticed that the assessing officer had passed the original assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act, wherein he had denied exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 11 of the Act.
It was further noticed that the matter relating to denial of exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 11 of the Act was carried to the ITAT and the Tribunal, vide its order dated 03-05-2019 passed in has held that the assessee is eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. In view of the above said order passed by the Tribunal, the manner of computation of income would change drastically. Under these set of facts, we are of the view that the issues contested before us need to be set aside to the file of the AO for examining afresh, since the assessee is held to be eligible for exemption under sec.11 of the Act..
When these facts were put to the notice of both the parties, both of them agreed that the issues contested in this appeal may be restored to the file of the AO. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to the file of the AO for examining them afresh in accordance with the provisions applicable to charitable institutions.
In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 20th September, 2019.
More judgments on Section 11
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Mata Lachmi Rotary Charitable Society… vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward - 1…ITA 310/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Shiva Shiksha Samiti, Deendayal Puram, Up… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Agra…ITA 415/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Sweekar, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 1, Exemp, NagpurITA 531/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Sweekar, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 1, Exemp, NagpurITA 530/NAG/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026