Section 10(29) — 7 judgments | BharatTax

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,GHAZIABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION-CIRCLE,GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 2667/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Agarwal, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agrawal, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Garg

Section 11Section 12Section 2(15)Section 234A

Development Act, 1973. In the instant case, prior to 1st April, 2003, the assessee was enjoying exemption under Section 10(20A) and Section 10(29). When these provisions were amended w.e.f. 1st April, 2003, then the necessity arose to register these institutions under Section 12A. In view of the objects

ACIT,CIRCLE 20(1), MUMBAI, LALBAUG MUMBAI vs. VIRJI DEVRAJ GADA, MATUNGA (W) MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4321/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhariassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Hakani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar, D.R

Section 10Section 10(29)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

which was claimed against remuneration and interest received from the firm, the expenses relating to exempt income under section 10(29) of the Act, which were not liable for set off against remuneration and interest received from the firm. Consequently, there was an under assessment of income

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE EXEMPTION, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 589/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 234A

DCIT Development Act, 1973. In the instant case, prior to 1st April, 2003, the assessee was enjoying exemption under Section 10(20A) and Section 10(29). When these provisions were amended w.e.f. 1st April, 2003, then the necessity arose to register these institutions under Section 12A. In view

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT E (CIRCLE), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 305/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 234A

DCIT Development Act, 1973. In the instant case, prior to 1st April, 2003, the assessee was enjoying exemption under Section 10(20A) and Section 10(29). When these provisions were amended w.e.f. 1st April, 2003, then the necessity arose to register these institutions under Section 12A. In view

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and appeal of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4334/DEL/2011[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2023AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri V. Rajakumar, Adv

Section 10Section 10(29)Section 10(33)Section 11Section 115JSection 2

that, on facts and circumstances of the case, both on facts and on law CIT (Appeals) has erred in restricting the Exemption under section 10(29) of the Income Tax Act on Profit instead of the Gross Income from Warehousing Activity of the Appellate Corporation, for which it has been ... after he himself having concluded that the Business of the Appellant is indivisible. 4. It is contended that the Computation of Income under section 10 (29) is wrong an requires revision. ITA. No. 4190/Del/2011 AND ITA. No. 4334/Del/2011 5. It is contended that the Appellant is entitled to Exemption under

CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and appeal of the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4190/DEL/2011[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2023AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasada N D Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri V. Rajakumar, Adv

Section 10Section 10(29)Section 10(33)Section 11Section 115JSection 2

that, on facts and circumstances of the case, both on facts and on law CIT (Appeals) has erred in restricting the Exemption under section 10(29) of the Income Tax Act on Profit instead of the Gross Income from Warehousing Activity of the Appellate Corporation, for which it has been ... after he himself having concluded that the Business of the Appellant is indivisible. 4. It is contended that the Computation of Income under section 10 (29) is wrong an requires revision. ITA. No. 4190/Del/2011 AND ITA. No. 4334/Del/2011 5. It is contended that the Appellant is entitled to Exemption under

CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORAITON vs. ACIT

The appeals stand disposed of in the aforesaid

ITA - 464 / 2010HC Delhi14 Jan 2011

Section 10Section 11BSection 143Section 147Section 148Section 3

income declaring a loss of Rs.1,078,36,6,678/-. In this return, the assessee had claimed Rs. 1514168354/- as exemption under Section 10 (29) of the Income-Tax Act, (hereinafter referred to as the „Act‟), being income derived from the letting of godown or Warehouses for storage purpose ... Assessing Officer further held that since the appellant is incorporated and constituted under Warehousing Corporations Act, 1962 and as per the provision of Section 10 (29) of the Act read with Section 11B of the Warehousing Corporations Act, 1962, the appellant income is exempted only to the extent

“Section 10(29)”