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.

59 results for “reassessment”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,359Delhi1,148Chennai641Bangalore510Ahmedabad347Jaipur338Kolkata255Hyderabad232Chandigarh185Pune179Indore132Raipur125Cochin105Rajkot81Visakhapatnam77Surat66Guwahati62Cuttack59Lucknow59Amritsar57Patna42Nagpur41Ranchi39Karnataka37Jodhpur29Agra25Telangana21SC18Dehradun17Allahabad17Jabalpur7Calcutta6Kerala5Rajasthan4Varanasi4A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Gauhati2Panaji2Himachal Pradesh2Punjab & Haryana2Uttarakhand1Orissa1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1

Key Topics

Section 1047Section 14746Section 14844Section 143(2)43Section 143(3)39Section 26326Section 1122Section 14A19Addition to Income19Disallowance

M/S. EZMA FOUNDATION,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION CIRCLE), BHUBANESWAR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 427/CTK/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Aug 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri A.P.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CITDR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 25Section 80G

Exemption of income from property held under - Accumulation of income - Assessment years 1998-99 to 2000-01 - Whether Form No. 10 could be furnished by assessee-trust for purposes of section 11(2), i.e., for accumulation of income, during reassessment

Showing 1–20 of 59 · Page 1 of 3

17
Exemption16
Reassessment15

ITO, WARD-2(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. REGIONAL COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and cross objections filed

ITA 408/CTK/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Jul 2017AY 2005-06

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

For Appellant: Shri Bhagaban Panda/Pradyumna Kumar SahooFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 10Section 10(23)(c)Section 11Section 12A

exemption of the generated surplus in any of the five years either u/s.10(23C)(vi) or under section 11 of the Act. Accordingly, assessments/reassessments for assessment years 2005-06 to 2009-10 were completed between 30.11.2010 and 20.12.2011 (for first four years, reassessments

SOURAV ALLOYS AND STEEL PVT. LTD.,ANGUL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 233/CTK/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.S Saini & Shri Aby T. Varkeyassessment Year :2006-07

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Asit Kumar Mohapatra, CIT DR
Section 12Section 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 158

reassessment proceedings it would be appropriate to refer to the said section. For facility, the provisions of Section 143(2) of the Act is extracted hereunder: “Section 143 (2) Where a return has been furnished under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, the Assessing Officer shall, – (i) where he has reason

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 262/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 270/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 268/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 470/CTK/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 265/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 261/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 469/CTK/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 471/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

RONALD EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 368/CTK/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 264/CTK/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 266/CTK/2019[2008--09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 267/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 269/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 263/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the assessment year 2006-07 was rejected by the CCIT, Orissa vide order dated, 30.05.2008 as stated in the "reasons recorded' is factually incorrect as the order of rejection by CCIT dated 30.05.2008 is pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 and not Assessment Year 2006-07. The same shall also be clearly evident

M/S. MAHASAKTI FOUNDATION,KALAHANDI vs. ACIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 134/CTK/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

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

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 40

reassessment order passed u/s.147 of the Act submitted that the registration u/s.12AA of the Act was granted to the assessee by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Sambalpur vide his order dated 28.5.2013 w.e.f. 29.11.2012. He submitted that sub- section (2) of Section 12A of the Act as amended by Finance Act, 2007 w.e.f. 1.6.2007 provides that where an application

OMM DHANA LAXMI JEWELLERS,ANGUL vs. PCIT, INCOME TAX

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 249/CTK/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Omm Dhanalaxmi Vs. Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar-1. Jewellers, Bazar Chowk, Main Road, Angul-759122 Pan/Gir No.Aagfd 8791 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/9/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/9/2024 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld Pr.Cit, Bhubaneswar-1 U/S.263 Of The Act Dated 30.3.2024 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1) That The Ld. Pr Cit Bhubaneswar Has Erred In Law By Utilizing Section 263 For Directing The Assessing Officer To Do Necessary Verification As Per The Order Of Hon'Ble Itat Cuttack Bench Vide Order Dated 01-10-2019 Which Was Already Barred By Limitation. Provisions Of 263 Does Not Allow To Proceed For A Matter Which Was Already Barred By Limitation. Hence, The Order Passed Us 263 Needs To Be Quashed In To.

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254Section 263

reassessment order dt. 29.09.2021 as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue, which is incorrect. Ld. AR also submits that no further order was passed by AO in compliance to the directions of the ITAT thus the said proceedings are barred by limitations. He, therefore prayed for cancellation of the order u/s 263 of the act on this score

INDUSTRIAL PROMOTION AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 272/CTK/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Sabat/B.K.Mohapatra, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14A

exempted income comes Rs.58,89,7901-. Hence, the same should be disallowed uls. 14A and added back to the total income, which was not done during the course of scrutiny assessment. v. Further, it is found that the assessee has not furnished the report of an accountant which is required to be furnished by the assessee in accordance with