“Section 10(27)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(27)13 judgments

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1249/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmr. Nikhil Sawhney, Vs. Dcit, 17, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, New Delhi-11003 Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaups0222Q

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur hansra, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

Account, against its income of other sources under the head "Business"" Their Lordships after analysing the provisions of section 70 and section 10(27) observed in the following manner: "In this case it is important to bear in mind that set-off is being claimed under Section ... Account, against its income of other sources under the head "Business"" Their Lordships after analysing the provisions of section 70 and section 10(27) observed in the following manner: "In this case it is important to bear in mind that set-off is being claimed under section

MR. TARUN SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1213/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri V. K. Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

MR. TARUN SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1212/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri V. K. Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

RITA GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR.2(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 2(14)Section 45Section 45(1)Section 47

upheld by the successive appellate authorities on. On reference u/s 256(1) of the Act, the Hon’ble High Court held that Section 10(27) of the Act excluded term only the income derived from a business of livestock breeding or poultry or dairy farming. The said section

HASMUKHBHAI KADVABHAI RAMANI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3)(2), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 570/SRT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.570/Srt/2023 (Ay 2016-17) (Hearing In Hybrid) Hasmukhbia Kadvabhai Ramani Income Tax Officer, P.No.180 Shantivan Society, Nr. Ward-2(3)(2), Surat, Vs Jakat Naka, Sarthana Jakat Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Naka, Surat-395006 Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No: Ajjpr 0148 L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 10(27)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 28Section 34Section 56Section 56(2)(viii)

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN

SMT. IRVIND KAUR GUJRAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 477/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 5(1)(c)Section 90(3)

enacted provision of section 80-JJ was that profit from the business of livestock and poultry which enjoyed total exemption under section 10(27) of the 22 Smt. Irvind Kaur Gujral vs. ITO Act from Assessment Years 1964-65 to 1975-76 became partially exempt by way of deduction

M/S WF ASIAN SMALLER COMPANIES FUND LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE 4(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 459/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.459/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) M/S. Wf Asian Smaller बिधम/ Acit, Circle-4(3)(2) Companies Fund Ltd Room No. 1611, 16Th Vs. C/O Ankul Goyal, Azb & Floor, Air India Building, Partners A8, Sector-4, Nariman Point, Mumbai- Noida 201301. 400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacw5648R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Deepak Chopra/Ankul Goyal Revenue By: Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ao Dated 19.01.2023 U/S 147 R.W.S 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Pursuant To The Direction Issued By The Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel (Drp) For Ay. 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Legal Issue Challenging The Action Of The Ao To Have Reopened The Original-Scrutiny-Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act, After Four (4) Years [From The End Of The Relevant Assessment Year] Without Satisfying The Additional Condition Precedent As Prescribed In The Proviso To Section 147(1) Of The Act. Since The Assessee Has Raised The Legal Issue Assailing The Jurisdiction Of Ao To Have Issued Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, Proposing Re-Opening Of The Original Assessment [Framed Under Scrutiny Under Section 143(3) Of The Act], We Will Adjudicate It First. For Appreciating The Legal Issue, Let Us

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra/Ankul GoyalFor Respondent: Shri Soumedu Kumar Dash (Sr

Section 133CSection 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147(1)Section 148Section 92E

Account, against its income of other sources under the head “Business” ” Their Lordships after analysing the provisions of section 70 and section 10(27) observed in the following manner: 26 A.Y. 2013-14 M/s. WF Asian Smaller Companies “In this case it is important to bear in mind that

INDIAN INSTITUTION OF BANKING AND FINANCE (FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE INDIA INSTITUTE OF BANKERS),MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6954/MUM/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhindian Institute Of Vs. Commissioner Of Income Banking & Finance Tax (Exemptions) (Formerly Known As The Indian Room No. 617, Piramal Institute Of Bankers) Chambers Lalbaug, Tower-I, Kohinoor City Mumbai - 400012 Commercial-Ii, 3Rd Floor, Kirol Road, Kurla (West), Mumbai – 400070 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaatt3309D Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Mr. Ashok Kumar Kardam

Section 10Section 11Section 143(3)Section 4

said order, the Tribunal has deliberated upon the issue in detail and has allowed the assessee exemption under section 10(27) of the Act. It was also held that the other income is incidental to the main income and the income of dividend interest etc. is also covered u/s 10

DCIT CC- 2(3), , MUMBAI vs. SHRI AVINASH N. BHOSALE, PUNE

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1436/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 10(38)Section 2Section 2(14)Section 250Section 45Section 47

Account, against its income of other sources under the head “Business” ”Their Lordships after analysing the provisions of section 70 and section 10(27) observed in the following manner: “In this case it is important to bear in mind that set-off is being claimed under Section

DY CIT - CC-2(3), MUMBAI vs. AVINASH NIVRUTTI BHOSALE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed for A

ITA 634/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 153ASection 48

Account, against its income of other sources under the head “Business” ”Their Lordships after analysing the provisions of section 70 and section 10(27) observed in the following manner: “In this case it is important to bear in mind that set-off is being claimed under Section

DY CIT CENTRAL CIR-2(3), MUMBAI vs. AMIT AVINASH BHOSALE, PUNE

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the A

ITA 166/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Shailja Rai

Section 10(38)Section 127(2)Section 132Section 153A

Account, against its income of other sources under the head “Business” ”Their Lordships after analysing the provisions of section 70 and section 10(27) observed in the following manner: “In this case it is important to bear in mind that set-off is being claimed under Section

DY. CIT CC- 2(3), MUMBAI vs. AMIT AVINASH BHOSALE, PUNE

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the A

ITA 165/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Shailja Rai

Section 10(38)Section 127(2)Section 132Section 153A

Account, against its income of other sources under the head “Business” ”Their Lordships after analysing the provisions of section 70 and section 10(27) observed in the following manner: “In this case it is important to bear in mind that set-off is being claimed under Section

DY CIT CC-2(3), MUMBAI vs. AVINASH NIVRUTTI BHOSALE, PUNE

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the A

ITA 123/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Shailja Rai

Section 10(38)Section 127(2)Section 132Section 153A

Account, against its income of other sources under the head “Business” ”Their Lordships after analysing the provisions of section 70 and section 10(27) observed in the following manner: “In this case it is important to bear in mind that set-off is being claimed under Section