ITAT Nagpur Judgments — July 2026

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for proper adjudication after providing the assessee with an opportunity of hearing.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking and that the assessee may not have received a fair opportunity due to the pandemic. Consequently, both the quantum addition and the penalty were restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

The Tribunal restored both the addition and the penalty to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to provide necessary information and was granted an opportunity of hearing.

The Tribunal held that deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) is available for interest earned from both cooperative and non-cooperative banks if the investments were made for business necessity and commercial expediency. The CIT(A)'s finding was reversed.

The Tribunal restored both the addition and the penalty to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to provide necessary information and was granted an opportunity of hearing.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had not decided the crucial legal issue regarding the validity of the notice issued to a deceased person. Following a Delhi High Court judgment, the Tribunal restored all issues to the CIT(A) for adjudication.

The Tribunal found that the orders were non-speaking and that the assessee may not have received a fair opportunity of hearing due to the pandemic. Therefore, the quantum addition and the penalty were restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored all issues back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The AO was directed to provide an adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The Tribunal held that interest income earned by a credit co-operative society from investments in banks, including nationalised banks, is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) if it's for commercial expediency and liquidity norms. The assessee's claim was allowed.

The Tribunal held that interest earned on deposits made from operational or statutory funds, which are intrinsically connected with the business of providing credit facilities to members, is attributable to the assessee's business activity. Therefore, such interest income is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal held that the compensation received under the BSNL VRS-2019 scheme constitutes retrenchment compensation and is eligible for exemption under section 10(10B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as a capital receipt not chargeable to tax without any limit. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal observed that the society's activities, particularly conferences sponsored by pharmaceutical companies with TDS, indicated a commercial nature rather than eleemosynary. The end users or beneficiaries of the activities were not clearly identified, and the evidence provided was insufficient to prove the genuineness of charitable work. The Tribunal agreed with the Departmental Representative that the element of charity was absent.

The Tribunal held that credit cooperative societies are eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) for interest and dividend income received from other cooperative banks and societies. The exclusion under Section 80P(4) does not apply to such societies.