CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, allowing the claim for interest paid to allottees and the income tax on perquisites. The order of the CIT(A) was modified to this extent.
What were the facts?
The Chandigarh Housing Board (CHB) acted as a nodal agency for a housing scheme and earned interest on funds deposited in FDRs. The CHB also paid income tax on perquisites provided to its employees. The Income Tax Department added these amounts to the CHB's income and levied penalties.
What were the issues?
The key issues were whether interest earned on FDRs by a nodal agency is taxable and whether income tax paid on perquisites provided to employees is a deductible expenditure.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (4 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ANDSHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER, आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 126/CHD/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 बनाम M/s Chandigarh Housing Board, "थायीलेखासं./PAN /TAN No:AAALC0132H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 103/CHD/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 The DCIT, बनाम M/s Chandigarh Housing Board, "थायीलेखासं./PAN /TAN No:AAALC0132H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 44/CHD/2021 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/s Chandigarh Housing Board, बनाम "थायीलेखासं./PAN /TAN No:AAALC0132H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 125/CHD/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s Chandigarh Housing Board, बनाम "थायीलेखासं./PAN /TAN No:AAALC0132H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"
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 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026