BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

32 results for “disallowance”+ Section 10Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai919Delhi832Bangalore544Kolkata398Chennai304Ahmedabad224Pune201Hyderabad157Chandigarh98Jaipur62Cochin51Karnataka50Lucknow38Indore33Cuttack32Visakhapatnam30Rajkot30Surat27Nagpur15Amritsar14Jodhpur13Agra10Telangana9Dehradun8Guwahati8Varanasi7Panaji6Ranchi6Calcutta4Raipur4Patna4Jabalpur3Allahabad1SC1Himachal Pradesh1Kerala1

Key Topics

Section 801A63Section 143(1)62Section 1136Exemption23Section 12A22Section 11(2)18Section 10B17Deduction16Section 1015Section 10A

BISWAJIT DAS,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 493/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 10Section 10BSection 2

disallowed the claimof the assessee u/s 10B on this basis after considering the Explanation (iii) of section 10AA as well

ITO, WARD-2(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. BISWAJIT DAS, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

15
Disallowance14
Addition to Income13
ITA 473/CTK/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 10Section 10BSection 2

disallowed the claimof the assessee u/s 10B on this basis after considering the Explanation (iii) of section 10AA as well

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

ITA 436/CTK/2024[AY 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 250

disallowance pertaining to delay in filing of Form 10 cannot be treated as a prima facie adjustment for the purposes of intimation under section 143(1)(a). Ground No. 2: When Rs. 10,45,000/- has been actually set apart under section 11(2) and reported in Form 10B

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

ITA 437/CTK/2024[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 250

disallowance pertaining to delay in filing of Form 10 cannot be treated as a prima facie adjustment for the purposes of intimation under section 143(1)(a). Ground No. 2: When Rs. 10,45,000/- has been actually set apart under section 11(2) and reported in Form 10B

STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ODISHA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARAD 5(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed and stay petition stands dismissed

ITA 301/CTK/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwals.P.No.11/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year :2017-18 State Pollution Control Board State Pollution Control Board, Vs. Ito, Ward 5(2), Plot No.A-118, Paribesh Bhawan, 118, Paribesh Bhawan, Bhubaneswar Nilakantha Nagar, Agar, Nayapali, Nayapali, Unit-Vii, Bhubaneswar Neswar Pan/Gir No.Aaals 2490 J Aaals 2490 J (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ca Walla, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/10/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/10/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA walla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT
Section 4

disallowed under s. 40A(3)—Smt. Sapna Sanjay Raisoni vs. ITO (2016) 179 TTJ 34 (Pune)(Trib) followed.” In the case of “Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education Vs. ITO, (2019) 176 ITD 47 (Mumbai)” the Hon’ble Mumbai Bench of ITAT it was held that; There is complete control of the State Government over the affairs of the assessee

DCIT, BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. DISCOVERTURE SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 50/CTK/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Bibek Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 10BSection 139(1)

disallowed deduction of Rs.3,67,15,136.19 claimed by the assessee u/s.10A and also did not allow deduction u/s.10B of the Act to the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). 5. The CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee and directed the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of exemption of Rs.3

WOMEN ORGANISATION FOR SOCIO CULTURAL AWARNESS,KEONJHAR vs. ITO,EXEMPTIONS, CUTTACK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 67/CTK/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 250

section 139(8A) of the Act which is a specific provision for fling the return of income belatedly within 24 months from the end of the assessment year. 04. That taking advantage of the delay committed by the assessee in filing the Audit Report in Form No. 10B within the due time, the Assessing Officer disallowed

PUBLIC SCHOOL,PHULBANI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, BERHAMPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 302/CTK/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Nov 2023AY 2020-21
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr. DR
Section 10B(8)Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)

disallowed. Further, the entire annual receipts have been treated as income. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the appeal of the assessee following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Wipro Ltd., reported in [2022] 140 taxmann.com 223 (SC), wherein it has been held that while interpreting the provisions of section 10B

PRAGATI CHARITABLE TRUST,PURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 525/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.525/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Pragati Charitable Trust Vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Plot No-66 Gyana Viahr, Ward, Bhubaneswar Gopinathpur B.O Dhauli Hills Puri, 751002 Pan No. :Aaqpn 2087 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K. Mishra,Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/12/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Addl/ Jcit (A)-5, Chennai, Dated 05/12/2024, In Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1070904602(1) Having Appeal No. Addl/Jcit(A)-5, Chennai/10003/2014-15 For The Assessment Year 2015- 2016. 2. The Assesee Has Challenged The Appellate Order On The Strength Of The Following Grounds Appeal:- 1. For That, When The Learned A.O. Has No Power & Authority To Determine The Income Of The Assessee Trust, Treating The Entire Gross Receipt As Income, While Processing The Return U/S.143(1) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2015-16, The Learned Cit(A) Has Committed Gross Error Of Law In Confirming The Said Order, As Such, Order Passed By The Learned Cit(A) As Well As By The Learned A.O., Being Not Sustainable In The Eye Of Law, Needs To Be Quashed In The Interest Of Justice

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Mishra,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 57

section 12A of the Act. Since the Form 10B was not filed within the stipulated time limit, CPC while processing the return of income, has disallowed

ASST. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAMBALPUR vs. SHREE BALAJI ENGICON LIMITED, BELPAHAR RS

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 320/CTK/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 153ASection 194CSection 80Section 801A

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 13/CTK/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 153ASection 194CSection 80Section 801A

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

M/S. SHREE BAALAJI ENGICONS LIMITED,JHARSUGUDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 296/CTK/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 153ASection 194CSection 80Section 801A

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 141/CTK/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 153ASection 194CSection 80Section 801A

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 142/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 153ASection 194CSection 80Section 801A

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 89/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 153ASection 194CSection 80Section 801A

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 88/CTK/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 153ASection 194CSection 80Section 801A

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( EXEMPTIONS), BHUBANESWAR vs. NABAJUGA EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST, DHENKANAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 127/CTK/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack26 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.127/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Dy. Cit(Exemptions), Vs Nabajuga Educational & Bhubaneswar Charitable Trust, Flat No.N/4-208, Irc Village, Khorda-751015 Pan No. : Aaatn 7735 R & Cross Objection No.03/Ctk/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.127/Ctk/2022) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Nabajuga Educational & Vs Dy. Cit(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar Charitable Trust, Flat No.N/4-208, Irc Village, Khorda-751015 Pan No. : Aaatn 7735 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Jena, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)

10B and grant the assessee the benefit of exemption u/s.11 of the 3 & CO No.03 /CTK/2022 Act. It was the submission that the CBDT has issued Circular No.2/2020, dated 03.01.2020, wherein for the assessment year 2018-2019, the power to condone the delay upto 365 days has been granted only to the Commissioner of Income Tax u/s.119

SRI DATTATREYA SAI ASHRAM TRUST,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE,, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 40/CTK/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jul 2023AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri S.K.Sarangi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Mahapatra, Pr.CIT-DR
Section 1Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(1)

Section 139 of the Act. In the present case, as it is noticed that the Form 10B has 4 been filed before the due date of filing of the return u/s.139(1) of the Act, therefore, the disallowance

NABA UTKAL TRUST,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 268/CTK/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Am आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.268/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2021-2022) Naba Utkal Trust, Vs Ito, Exemption, Bhubaneswar Plot No.841, Keshab Complex, Cuttack Road, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar-751010 Pan No. : Aabtn 0126 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order, Dated 28.12.2024 Passed By The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A), Panaji, For The Assessment Year 2021-2022. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 60 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein That The Delay Of 60 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Is Due To Lack Of Knowledge About The Order Passed By The Ld.Pcit. Accordingly, The Assessee Prayed That The Delay Of 60 Days May Kindly Be Condoned & Appeal Of The Assessee May Kindly Be Admitted For Hearing. Ld. Sr. Dr Did Not Raise Any Objection To This Contention Of The Assessee For Condonation Of Delay. Accordingly, We Are Of The View That The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11(2)Section 119(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)

section 119(2) of the Act and decide on merits. However, while deciding the appeal of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee stating that the ld. CIT(A) has no power to condone the delay for late filing of Form 10B. 4. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in further appeal before

REGIONAL COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT TRUST,KHURDA vs. CIT(EXEMPTION) HYDERABAD, AT- BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 22/CTK/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.22/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) Regional College Of Vs Cit(Exemption), Hyderabad At Management Trust, Bhubaneswar Gd-2/12, 2/13, Chakadola Vihar Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar-751023 Pan No. :Aabtr 3100 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra & Himanshu Jena, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/06/2024

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra & Himanshu Jena, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 57

disallowed or not was the subject matter of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and only the validity of the order u/s.263 of the Act was liable to be considered by the Tribunal in the present proceedings. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. At the outset, what is to be understood is that the purpose of Section