THE PRAJATANTRA PRACHAR SAMITY,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

Charitable Trust v. WTO & Ors. 222 ITR 523 (All). 5. The order relied on by the learned AR follows the decision in the case of SSA's Emerald Meadows (SC, supra) rejecting the Revenue SLP, by a non-speaking order, against the Karnataka HC order holding no substantial question of law arising for determination following the same HC decision

THE PRAJATANTRA PRACHAR SAMITY,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

Charitable Trust v. WTO & Ors. 222 ITR 523 (All). 5. The order relied on by the learned AR follows the decision in the case of SSA's Emerald Meadows (SC, supra) rejecting the Revenue SLP, by a non-speaking order, against the Karnataka HC order holding no substantial question of law arising for determination following the same HC decision

THE PRAJATANTRA PRACHAR SAMITY,CUTTACK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

Charitable Trust v. WTO & Ors. 222 ITR 523 (All). 5. The order relied on by the learned AR follows the decision in the case of SSA's Emerald Meadows (SC, supra) rejecting the Revenue SLP, by a non-speaking order, against the Karnataka HC order holding no substantial question of law arising for determination following the same HC decision

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

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

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 that money set apart was spent in the subsequent year. (Copy of audited P& L Attached). As during the subsequent

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

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 that money set apart was spent in the subsequent year. (Copy of audited P& L Attached). As during the subsequent

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

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 that money set apart was spent in the subsequent year. (Copy of audited P& L Attached). As during the subsequent