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.

3 results for “house property”+ Section 10Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi150Mumbai142Bangalore131Chennai39Kolkata32Ahmedabad27Jaipur27Hyderabad20Calcutta16Pune11Lucknow11Karnataka8Telangana8Indore7Surat6Chandigarh5SC4Amritsar3Cuttack3Guwahati2Rajasthan2Varanasi2Orissa1Kerala1Jodhpur1Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 12A9Section 2(15)4Section 772Exemption2

ITO, BHUBANESWAR vs. ORISSA COMPUTER APPLICATION CENTRE, BHUBANESWAR

ITA 282/CTK/2015[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Oct 2017AY 2000-01

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR/D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 251

House property rather its incidental to the grant received by the assessee for implementation of the govt. The officer order has been communicated vide letter no 9652 dated. 23.11.96, 11. On 21.12.1996 the assessee being an agency of the Govt, has communicated to the Dept of science and technology for vetting draft lease deed with lnfosys and fixation of monthly

BHUBANESWAR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 329/CTK/2013[]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2017

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadalebhubaneswar Development Vs. Cit, Bhubaneswar. Authority, Akash Shova Building, Sachivalaya Marg, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Aaalb 0073 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.Naik/R.K.Kar, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 77

housing accommodation for various sections of people of Punjab and especially for planning & development in the cities, town & villages. It was further stated that no profit motive could be attributable to the above activities and to creating amenities of public goods. However, the Hon'ble IT AT. Chandigarh Bench in ITA No. 764/CHD/2003 as reported in 156 Taxman

WATCO,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 78/CTK/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiawatco, Ground Floor, Unnati Bhawan, Satyanagar, Bhubaneswar Pan No.Aabcw 7947 A ………………Assessee Versus Cit(Exemption), Hyderabad ………………..Revenue Shri B.R.Pattnaik, Ar For The Assessee Shri Suresh Shivnandan, Cit-Dr For The Revenue Date Of Hearing : 27/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed U/S 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad, Dated 06.12.2019, On The Following Grounds :- 1. The Order Passed By The Learned Cit(Exemption), Hyderabad Is Capricious, Invalid, Illegal & Bad In Law. 2. The Learned Commissioner (Exemption) Erred In Rejecting Our Application For Registration U/S 12Aa Of Income Tax Act On The Ground That The Appellant Was Carrying On Activities In The Nature Of Commerce & The Object Of The Appellant Were Not To Be Treated As For Charitable Purpose U/S 2(15) Of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Appellant Craves Leaves To Amend, Modify, Oblige, Add To Or Resigned Any Or All Of The Above Ground.

Section 12ASection 2(15)

Housings Urban Development Department from time to time. By Order of the Governor G. MATHI VATHANAN Commissioner-o/m-Secretary to Government 3. Subsequently, on 16.08.2017, the assessee has filed an application in Form 10A for seeking registration u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟ in short) on 30.06.2019. The said application was rejected by Commissioner of Income