PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

119; or (d) the order has not been passed in accordance with any decision which is prejudicial to the assesse, rendered by the jurisdictional High Court or Supreme Court in the case of the assessee or any other person. A simple reading of the section 263 of the Act quoted above makes it clear that the power of suo moto

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

119; or (d) the order has not been passed in accordance with any decision which is prejudicial to the assesse, rendered by the jurisdictional High Court or Supreme Court in the case of the assessee or any other person. A simple reading of the section 263 of the Act quoted above makes it clear that the power of suo moto

OORISSA EVANGELIST TRUST ASSOCIATION,CUTTACK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, CUTTACK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Orissa Evangelistic Trust Ito, Exemption Ward, Cuttack Association, Aaykar Bhavan, Shelter Chhak At-Kesharpur, Buxi Bazar, Tulsipur, Cuttack, Vs. Cuttack-753001 Odisha-753008 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaato0708P Assessee By : Shri Sk Sarangi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nishanth Rao B, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025

Charitable Trust -vs.- ITO (Exemption) reported in (2021) 125 taxmann.com 75, wherein it was held that "benefit of exemption should not be denied merely on account of delay in filing of the audit report". He, therefore, pleaded to set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities. 6. On the other hand, Id. Departmental Representative submits that the assessee ought

INDIRA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Income Tax Officer, Exemption Indira Gandhi Institute Of Ward, Bhubaneswar, Pharmaceutical Sciences Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, Third N-4/208 Nayapalli, Irc Village, Floor, Regional Telecom Trg Vs. Khorda, Odisha-751015 Centre, Vss Nagar Road, Bhubaneswar-751007 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati7724B Assessee By : Shri Kc Jena, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025

Charitable Trust -vs.- ITO (Exemption) reported in (2021) 125 taxmann.com 75, wherein it was held that "benefit of exemption should not be denied merely on account of delay in filing of the audit report". He, therefore, pleaded to set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities. 6. On the other hand, Id. Departmental Representative submits that the assessee ought

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

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

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

section 119(2)(b) of the Act.” 3. We will first take up the appeal in ITA No. 436/CTK/2024. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the return of income which was processed u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act by the CPC in which the claim of exemption was denied. Aggrieved with the intimation, the assessee

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

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

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

section 119(2)(b) of the Act.” 3. We will first take up the appeal in ITA No. 436/CTK/2024. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the return of income which was processed u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act by the CPC in which the claim of exemption was denied. Aggrieved with the intimation, the assessee

JEEVAN KALYANA SADHANA KENDRA,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, SAMBALPUR

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

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

Trust registered u/s 12A of the Act and engaged in the public charitable activities. The assessee filed the audit report u/s 12A(1)(b) of the Act in Form No. 10B in the old format on 30/10/2023. Later on the assessee filed its return of income dated 30.10.2023 claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act and the Auditor filed

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

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

charitable trust and accumulation u/s.11(2) of the Act taxed the entire income due to audit report filed after due date by raising the demand along with interest of Rs.12,69,400/-. The assessee during the appellate proceedings relied on a Circular issued by 3 the CBDT being Circular No.16/2022, dated 19th July, 2022, wherein it was stated that where

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

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

119(2)(b) of Income Tax Act if the delay in filing of the return of income is on account of the bonafide reasons. 2.4.3 In view of the reasons enumerated in the above para, it is submitted before the Hon’ble Bench that the contention of the appellant that the delay in filing of the return of income

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

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

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

119(2)(b) of the IT Act to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad for condonation of the delay committed in filing the Audit Report in Form No. 10B. 06. That the Notice under section 250 of the IT Act for hearing in the appeal was issued to which the assessee requested to keep the matter in abeyance till

MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD.,SAMBALPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), SAMBALPUR

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

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.174/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015 - 2016) Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Podar, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.M.Keshkamat, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am :

119 DTR 139 (Del.) (HC) ITA No.534 & 510/JP/2017. In this case the amount paid to acquire network and the facilities was held to be Intangible Asset. A photocopy of the judgment is enclosed at Page No.161-169 of the P/B-VOl-I1. 2.13.6 The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in case of DCIT vs. Sun Pharmaceuticals