ITAT Panaji Judgments — August 2026

The Tribunal held that the assessee cooperative society is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) on its enhanced business income, following CBDT circulars and judicial precedents. The enhanced income is attributable to banking business.

The Tribunal held that the filing of Form No. 10B is directory in nature and a delay in its submission should not lead to the denial of exemption under Section 11. The assessee had filed the form before the intimation order was passed.

The Tribunal, noting the assessee's non-compliance at both assessment and appellate stages, decided to grant one more opportunity to substantiate its claim. The impugned order was set aside for statistical purposes.

The Tribunal found that the TDS was deducted under Section 194NF for cash withdrawals, not Section 194A for interest income. The bank statement also supported this. Therefore, the addition was deleted.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to reasonable cause. The Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity to present details to the Assessing Officer and set aside the impugned order.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding sufficient cause. It then restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with another opportunity to present its case, subject to diligent cooperation.

The Tribunal held that the assessee cooperative society is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) on its enhanced business income, following CBDT circulars and judicial precedents. The enhanced income is attributable to banking business.

The Tribunal held that the assessee cooperative society is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) on its enhanced business income, following CBDT circulars and judicial precedents. The enhanced income is attributable to banking business.

The Tribunal held that the assessee cooperative society is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) on its enhanced business income, following CBDT circulars and judicial precedents. The enhanced income is attributable to banking business.

The Tribunal held that the assessee cooperative society is entitled to deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) on its enhanced business income, following CBDT circulars and judicial precedents. The enhanced income is attributable to banking business.

The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of depreciation on Todou plant, following the principle of consistency. Regarding foreign travel expenses, the Tribunal sustained a disallowance of 10% instead of the 20% made by the AO.

The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of depreciation on Todou plant, following the principle of consistency. Regarding foreign travel expenses, the Tribunal sustained a disallowance of 10% instead of the 20% made by the AO.

The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of depreciation on Todou plant, following the principle of consistency. Regarding foreign travel expenses, the Tribunal sustained a disallowance of 10% instead of the 20% made by the AO.

The Tribunal held that denial of exemption under Section 11 solely on account of a delay in filing Form 10B is not justified, especially when the report was available before the processing of the return. The Tribunal relied on various High Court and Tribunal decisions supporting this view.

The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of depreciation on Todou plant, following the principle of consistency. Regarding foreign travel expenses, the Tribunal sustained a disallowance of 10% instead of the 20% made by the AO.

The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of depreciation on Todou plant, following the principle of consistency. Regarding foreign travel expenses, the Tribunal sustained a disallowance of 10% instead of the 20% made by the AO.

The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of depreciation on Todou plant, following the principle of consistency. Regarding foreign travel expenses, the Tribunal sustained a disallowance of 10% instead of the 20% made by the AO.

The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of depreciation on Todou plant, following the principle of consistency. Regarding foreign travel expenses, the Tribunal sustained a disallowance of 10% instead of the 20% made by the AO.

The Tribunal held that the amount received under the BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2019, is in the nature of retrenchment compensation and is a capital receipt exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Act. The findings of the CIT(A) were set aside.

The Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to consider the submissions filed by the assessee and grant a reasonable opportunity to furnish further details.

The Tribunal condoned the significant delay in filing the appeal, citing sufficient cause due to wrong professional guidance. The Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, emphasizing a justice-oriented approach.

The Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal regarding disallowance of depreciation on Todou plant, following the principle of consistency. Regarding foreign travel expenses, the Tribunal sustained a disallowance of 10% instead of the 20% made by the AO.

The Tribunal held that the LTCG from the sale of Turbotech Engineering Limited shares were genuine and eligible for exemption under Section 10(38). The Tribunal followed previous decisions of co-ordinate benches that had adjudicated similar issues concerning the same scrip.

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were illegal and bad in law. Following a coordinate bench decision and the principle laid down in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd., the Tribunal quashed the reassessment order.

The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the CIT(A)'s file. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The Tribunal held that interest income earned by a cooperative society from deposits with another cooperative society is eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d). Section 80P(4) does not affect this deduction for the assessee.

The Tribunal held that entities registered under the Karnataka Souhard Sahakari Act, 1997, are considered cooperative societies for the purpose of Section 80P. It further held that interest income earned from investments in banks is attributable to the banking business and eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, directing it to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits after providing a hearing. This was done in the interest of justice and with the consent of both parties.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It held that the amount received by BSNL employees under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2019, is in the nature of retrenchment compensation and is a capital receipt exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Act.

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 134 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), citing sufficient cause and a justice-oriented approach. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

The Tribunal admitted additional evidence (PAN/Aadhaar of depositors) and restored the issue of the remaining addition of Rs. 19,09,017/- to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It held that the amount received by BSNL employees under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2019, is in the nature of retrenchment compensation and is a capital receipt exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Act.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer. The assessee was directed to cooperate with the Assessing Officer and provide all necessary documentation.

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal noted discrepancies in the dates of filing the return of income as reflected in different intimation orders. Due to these inconsistencies, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

The Tribunal held that the penalty under Section 271F for non-furnishing of return should be deleted, considering the tax consultant's admitted error and the assessee's reliance on them. Similarly, the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was deleted as the income was already reflected in Form 16 and 26AS, and the income declared in the Section 148 return was accepted.

The Tribunal held that the penalty under Section 271F for non-furnishing of return should be deleted, considering the tax consultant's admitted error and the assessee's reliance on them. Similarly, the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was deleted as the income was already reflected in Form 16 and 26AS, and the income declared in the Section 148 return was accepted.

The Tribunal granted permission to the assessee to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for AY 2016-17, deleting an addition of Rs. 7,00,000/- and directing fresh consideration of another addition. For AY 2018-19, the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication of specific additions.

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh adjudication. The Assessing Officer is directed to examine the details to be furnished by the assessee regarding business activities and incidental expenses.

The Tribunal found that the assessee had withdrawn Rs. 7.55 lakhs in cash from his bank account prior to the property purchase. This withdrawal, along with regular income, was sufficient to explain the cash payment.

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not consider the remand report and the documentary evidence provided by the assessee. Therefore, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

The Tribunal admitted an additional ground of appeal concerning the validity of the reassessment notice. Considering the totality of facts and in the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter for fresh adjudication.

The Tribunal dismissed the grounds challenging the reopening of assessment, finding the notice valid. However, it remitted the issue of ownership and capital gains to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

The Tribunal held that the amount received by BSNL employees under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2019, is in the nature of retrenchment compensation and is a capital receipt exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Act.

The Tribunal held that the amounts received by BSNL employees under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2019, are in the nature of retrenchment compensation and are capital receipts exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Act.

The Tribunal held that the amount received by BSNL employees under the VRS is in the nature of retrenchment compensation and is a capital receipt exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Act. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.

The Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 12.00 lakh received as a loan from the husband, finding it to be explained. For the remaining addition, the Tribunal sustained an addition of Rs. 1.00 lakh, considering it part of gross receipts already offered to tax under presumptive taxation.

The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal for AY 2016-17, deleting an addition of Rs. 7,00,000/- and directing fresh consideration of another addition. For AY 2018-19, the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication of specific additions.

The Tribunal held that the amount received by BSNL employees under the VRS is in the nature of retrenchment compensation and is a capital receipt exempt from tax under Section 10(10B) of the Act. The CIT(A)'s findings were set aside.