M/S. NABADIGANT EDUCATIONAL TRUST,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are dismissed

charitable objective of the trust and generation of profits which are diverted to those funds. 5.3.4 In view of the above discussion and more particularly, considering the advance of loan in violation of section 13(1)(c) and deposit of the amount in violation of section 13(1)(d

M/S. ORISSA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, ITA No.335/CTK/2017 is allowed and ITA

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Orissa Cricket Association Vs. Cit(Exemptions), Barabati Stadium,Cuttack-753001, Hyderabad Odisha, Pan No. : Aaaao 0319 F & Orissa Cricket Association Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Barabati Stadium, Cuttack Cuttack-753001, Odisha Pan No. : Aaaao 0319 F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan & D.Das, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Saad Kidwai, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/12/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri N.S.Saini, Am:

charitable or not and the subsequent activities carried out for fulfillment of the same are genuine or not. While looking into an application for registration of a Trust u/s 12AA(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, section 11 and section 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not required to be looked into. Section 11 and section 13

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

D-E) (1,59,34,478) (1,84,63,954) (79,41,522) From the above details it can be clearly seen that during the captioned AY.s the appellant has applied its gross receipts entirely for its charitable objects in India. In fact the appellant has made excess expenditure over income. Thus the appellant has made application of its gross

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. S.M.CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM These are appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the CIT(A)-3, Bhubaneswar dated 16.6.2017 for the assessment years 2009-2010 & 2011-12. 2. ITA No.430/CTK/2017 for the assessment year 2009-2010 and ITA No.432/CTK/2017 for the assessment year 2011-12 are against the order

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. S.M.CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM These are appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the CIT(A)-3, Bhubaneswar dated 16.6.2017 for the assessment years 2009-2010 & 2011-12. 2. ITA No.430/CTK/2017 for the assessment year 2009-2010 and ITA No.432/CTK/2017 for the assessment year 2011-12 are against the order

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. S.M.CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

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

D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM These are appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the CIT(A)-3, Bhubaneswar dated 16.6.2017 for the assessment years 2009-2010 & 2011-12. 2. ITA No.430/CTK/2017 for the assessment year 2009-2010 and ITA No.432/CTK/2017 for the assessment year 2011-12 are against the order