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

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

2) of the :- 47 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur LT. Act, 196\ would fall in the tax-net and the other income of the appellant trust would remain exempt as per the provisions of section

ITO(EXEMPTIONS), BHUBANESWAR vs. ADHIKAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010

2(15) and the assessee is not entitled for the benefit of section 11 for that part of income generated in the hands of the assessee Running its micro finance business. Alternatively, one has to look into section 11(4A).. Sub-section (4A) provides that exemption shall not apply in relation to any income of a trust or an institution

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

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

charitable purpose the aggregate sum of Rs. 1.70.369. Leaving a balance of Rs. 87,910. The question is whether the assessee is entitled to accumulate twenty five percent of Rs. 2.57,376 contends, or twenty five percent of Rs. 87,010 as the revenue appeared to contend. 2. Considering the facts of the case and ratio laid down

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

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

charitable purpose the aggregate sum of Rs. 1.70.369. Leaving a balance of Rs. 87,910. The question is whether the assessee is entitled to accumulate twenty five percent of Rs. 2.57,376 contends, or twenty five percent of Rs. 87,010 as the revenue appeared to contend. 2. Considering the facts of the case and ratio laid down

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

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

charitable purpose the aggregate sum of Rs. 1.70.369. Leaving a balance of Rs. 87,910. The question is whether the assessee is entitled to accumulate twenty five percent of Rs. 2.57,376 contends, or twenty five percent of Rs. 87,010 as the revenue appeared to contend. 2. Considering the facts of the case and ratio laid down

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 :

Charitable Trust Fund IR 252 indeed a bonafide assessee should not be precluded from switching over to another system of accounting which he find convenient and which would reflect real Income. g) Method must be applied consistently: No particular basis of valuation is suitable for all types of business, but whatever the basis adopted, it should be applied consistently

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

Charitable Trust. the total income is thus worked out at ₹ 2,52,02,716/- which has been rounded off to ₹ 2,52,02,720/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) in which one of the grounds of appeal taken was that the expenses of ₹ 2