SUKANTI EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,SONEPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, SAMBALPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

5. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made and the paper book filed have been examined. In the paper book filed before us, the assessee has given a brief history of the case as under: “The appellant is a Trust running of educational activities and registered under the Indian Trust Act. The assessee is neither registered u/s 12A/12AA

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

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable trust. The issue arising in these two appeals, prima facie, appears to be covered in favour of the respondent assessee and against the revenue by the decisions of the High Court and Supreme Court. The Apex Court's decision is to the effect that Form 10 required to be filed under rule 17 of the Rule, could be filed

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

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

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

Charitable & Chaleshwar Temple Trust (supra) are of no relevance because these judgements are of two different High Courts but this aspect of the matter is covered against the assessee by the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court cited by the Ld. D.R. 14. The 2nd submission of the Ld. A.R. in the written submission is this that requirement of filing

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

5: Even otherwise since the delay in filing Form 10 is condonable one, (vide Board’s Circular No. 273 dt. 3/6/1980) Assessing Officer ought not to have rejected the claim for deduction under section 11(2) without educating the assessee about the remedial measures available with him. Ground No. 6: That the assessee has been taxed for a procedural delay

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

5: Even otherwise since the delay in filing Form 10 is condonable one, (vide Board’s Circular No. 273 dt. 3/6/1980) Assessing Officer ought not to have rejected the claim for deduction under section 11(2) without educating the assessee about the remedial measures available with him. Ground No. 6: That the assessee has been taxed for a procedural delay

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable trust. It enjoys the benefit of registration u/s.12AA of the Act. The assessee had filed its return of income for the relevant assessment year and the same came to be processed u/s.143(1) of the Act, wherein the entire expenditure claimed by the assessee came to be disallowed and the exemption u/s.11 of the Act was also disallowed

ODISHA SPORTS DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION COMPANY,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION WARD, JEYPORE

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.496-498/Ctk/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Odisha Sports Development & Vs Dcit, Exemption Ward, Promotion Company, Bhubaneswar Western Stand, Kalinga Stadium Bhubaneswar, Odisha Pan No. :Aabco 9237 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated All Dated 30.09.2024, Passed In Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1069244316(1), Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1069244321(1) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1069244327(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-2016, 2016-2017 & 2017-2018. 2. Shri P.R.Mohanty, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sanjay Kumar, Ld Cit Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By Ld Ar Of The Assessee That The Assessee Is A Company Promoted By The Government Of Odisha. It Was The Submission That The Company’S Accounts Were Audited By Statutory Auditors. It Was The 2

5). At the time of filing of Income Tax Return the option under explanation 2 to sub-section (1) of section 11 was exercised and consequently, form-9A (Copy Enclosed) was filed. It may be seen from the subsequent year account i.e AY 2017-18 that we have spent expenses in excess of income by Rs.3,30,06,672/- indicating

ODISHA SPORTS DEVELOPMENT ANDPROMOTION COMPANY,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita Nos.496-498/Ctk/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Odisha Sports Development & Vs Dcit, Exemption Ward, Promotion Company, Bhubaneswar Western Stand, Kalinga Stadium Bhubaneswar, Odisha Pan No. :Aabco 9237 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated All Dated 30.09.2024, Passed In Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024- 25/1069244316(1), Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1069244321(1) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1069244327(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-2016, 2016-2017 & 2017-2018. 2. Shri P.R.Mohanty, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sanjay Kumar, Ld Cit Dr Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. It Was Submitted By Ld Ar Of The Assessee That The Assessee Is A Company Promoted By The Government Of Odisha. It Was The Submission That The Company’S Accounts Were Audited By Statutory Auditors. It Was The 2

5). At the time of filing of Income Tax Return the option under explanation 2 to sub-section (1) of section 11 was exercised and consequently, form-9A (Copy Enclosed) was filed. It may be seen from the subsequent year account i.e AY 2017-18 that we have spent expenses in excess of income by Rs.3,30,06,672/- indicating

ODISHA SPORTS DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION COMPANY,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

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

5). At the time of filing of Income Tax Return the option under explanation 2 to sub-section (1) of section 11 was exercised and consequently, form-9A (Copy Enclosed) was filed. It may be seen from the subsequent year account i.e AY 2017-18 that we have spent expenses in excess of income by Rs.3,30,06,672/- indicating

SRI DATTATREYA SAI ASHRAM TRUST,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO EXEMPTION , BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable trust filing its return of income regularly. It was the submission that originally the return filed by the assessee for the relevant assessment year admittedly did not accompany the Form 10 as was required to be filed. Consequent to non-filing of the Form 10, the intimation came to be issued u/s.143(1) of the Act bringing

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

139(8A) of the IT Act without accepting that the Audit Report in Form No. 10B has been filed before 30 days from the due date for filing the return prescribed under the above section.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust and had filed its return of income

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 :

5 was inserted to the proviso which makes it mandatory on the part of the AO to allow depreciation irrespective of claim made by the assessee. 2.8 That the intangible assets include Leasehold interest, mlneral rights as exhibited in the List of Intangible Assets given by Intangible Business Ltd. reproduced in 'The Chartered Accountant' journal of the institute of Chartered

KALINGA INSTITUTE OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY,PATIA BHUNANESWAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.177/Ctk/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Vs Cit (Exemption), Hyderabad Technology, Patia, Bhubaneswar Pan No. :Aaatk 3103 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/07/2024

charitable institution which is running educational institution. The assessee had filed its return of income for the relevant assessment year and the same came to be processed u/s.143(1) of the Act and subsequently as there was a mistake in the computation of tax, the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s144B of the Act on 19.04.2021 was rectified vide order