BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

89 results for “depreciation”+ Section 37clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,687Delhi2,522Bangalore1,000Chennai872Ahmedabad643Kolkata501Hyderabad306Jaipur292Pune232Chandigarh204Raipur158Indore126Cochin118Visakhapatnam115Surat105Cuttack89Amritsar87Karnataka83Ranchi50Rajkot48Guwahati45Lucknow45SC35Nagpur34Jodhpur31Telangana24Kerala20Dehradun15Patna15Agra14Allahabad13Panaji13Calcutta10Punjab & Haryana3Varanasi3Rajasthan2Jabalpur2MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1Tripura1Gauhati1D.K. JAIN H.L. DATTU JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1

Key Topics

Addition to Income63Section 26342Section 1042Disallowance42Section 143(3)29Section 153A26Section 153D24Depreciation18Section 14A17Limitation/Time-bar

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

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

ITA 174/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

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 :

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Podar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 35ESection 37Section 37(1)

Depreciation on Leasehold Land U/s. 32 (1) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as an Intangible Assets - Rs. 27491.00 Lacs. Additional Grounds/ Alternate claim 3.1.1. The authorities below have erred in not allowing the alternate claim of expenditure u/s. 37(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 on the basis of actual expenditure incurred ; or 3.1.2. The authorities below

Showing 1–20 of 89 · Page 1 of 5

16
Natural Justice16
Charitable Trust15

PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 560/CTK/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Apr 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra/A.K.Sabat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CITDR

37(1) as well as section 40A(1O) of the Act. 5. Ld D.R. though relied on the orders of lower authorities but Id not cite any contrary decisions before us. 20. After considering the rival submissions and perusing materials available on record, we find that the issue at hand is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble Kerala

RIO TINTO ORISSA MINING PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 294/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack13 Mar 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(2)Section 32

depreciation on the fixed assets as per the provisions of the Act. In my humble understanding of the provisions of Section 37

MGM GREEN ENERGY LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 370/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.370/Ctk/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015) Mgm Green Energy Limited, Vs Jcit, Range Rourkela, Rourkela 5-A, Forest Park, Bhubaneswar Pan No. :Aahcm 8472 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Sh A.K.Sabat & Sh B.K.Mahapatra, Cas राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1. Bhubaneswar, Dated 11.06.2019, In I.T.Appeal No.0388/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Assessee Has Taken As Many As Six Grounds Of Appeal, Relating To Various Additions/Disallowances Made To The Income Declared By The Assessee & Also Against The Adjustments Made In The Book Profit U/S.115Jb Of The Act. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- I) The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee, Which Is Arbitrary, Erroneous & Bad, Both In The Eyes Of Law. Ii) Disallowance Of Interest Expenses U/S.36(Iii) Of The Act At Rs.1,65,18,400/-; Iii) Disallowance Of Expenses U/S.14A Of The Act/Rule 8D Of It Rules At Rs.2,44,82,488/-; Iv) Addition Of Disallowance Of Expenses U/S.14A At Rs.2,44,82,488/- In The Book Profit As Computed U/S 115Jb; V) Addition/Disallowance Of Expenses U/S.115Jb Of The Act Under The Book Profits; Vi) Disallowance Of Differential Depreciation Of Rs.1,16,63,697/-

For Appellant: Sh A.K.Sabat & Sh B.K.Mahapatra, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 123Section 14ASection 2Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

depreciation reserves and, thus, entire investment had been made in sister concern out of interest-free funds - Commissioner (Appeals) accepted assessee's contention and directed Assessing Officer to allow entire amount of interest under section 36(1)(iii) - Tribunal upheld order of Commissioner (Appeals) - On instant appeal, it was seen that Commissioner (Appeals) as 10 also Tribunal had recorded

AES ORISSA DISTRIBUTION PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 68/CTK/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 147Section 148

depreciation of Rs.21,214/-) and the AO having failed to do so and the learned CIT(Appeals)dismissing the Ground in this regard, is against the principles of natural justice, arbitrary, unjustified, wrong, erroneous and bad, both in the eye of law and on facts and legally untenable. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, supplement, modify the grounds here

AES ORISSA DISTRIBUTION PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 69/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jan 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 147Section 148

depreciation of Rs.21,214/-) and the AO having failed to do so and the learned CIT(Appeals)dismissing the Ground in this regard, is against the principles of natural justice, arbitrary, unjustified, wrong, erroneous and bad, both in the eye of law and on facts and legally untenable. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, supplement, modify the grounds here

RUKMANI INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 358/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.358/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Rukmani Infra Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Plot No.251, District Centre, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar-16 Pan No. : Aaecr 1585 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None : Shri Manoj Kumar Goutam, Cit-Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Has Been Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 16.06.2017, For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Extracted From The Available Records Are That, The Assessee, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956, Engaged In The Business Of Erection, Commissioning, Technical & Maintenance Service To Different Power Plants. The Return Of Income For The Ay 2013-14 Was Filed By The Assessee On 01.10.2013 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,65,91,030/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected Under Cass. Notice U/S 143(2) & 143(1) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. Assessment Proceedings Were Completed By The Ao & Concluded With An Addition Of Rs.3,58,95,574/- Under Four Different

For Appellant: None
Section 143(2)Section 68

section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8.2 Ld LCTDR had further augmented by taking us to the order of CIT(A) whereby it has come out that the assessee contends in the course 30 of appeal hearing that the amount of Rs.40,22,979/- represent expenses on construction of temporary hutments for the labour at the site

DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR vs. M/S. NATIONAL ALUMINIUM COMPANY LIMITED, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 339/CTK/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.339 & 340/Ctk/2016 Dcit, Corporate Circle1(2)/ Vs. National Aluminium Company Acit, Circle-2(2), Limited, Bhubaneswar Nalco Bhavan, P/1, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 7449 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.352 & 353/Ctk/2016 & Ita No.374/Ctk/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-11, 2012-13 & 2011-12) National Aluminium Company Vs. Jcit Range-2/ Limited, Acit, Corporate Circle-1(2) Nalco Bhavan, P/1, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 7449 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.01/Ctk/2015 & 25/Ctk/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.376/Ctk/14 & Ita No.340/Ctk/2016) (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012 & 2012-2013) National Aluminium Company Vs. Acit, Circle-2(2)/ Limited, Dcit, Corporate Circle- Nalco Bhavan, P/1, Nayapalli, 1(2), Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn 7449 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain/B.K.Mahapatra, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CIT DR
Section 14A

depreciation claimed. 9. Other question proposed by the Revenue is in relation to computation of book profit under Section 115 JA of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer had held that the provision is toward unexpected liability and therefore was required to be added to the book profit under Section 115JA of the Income Tax Act. The CIT appeals

ACIT, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for the assessment years

ITA 397/CTK/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Poddar/N.Kedia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe, CIT DR
Section 143(3)

section 32(1) and, therefore, there is no question of allowing depreciation on said rights. 46. We find that the assessee has raised these additional grounds as per the direction of Hon’ble High Court of Orissa, Cuttack in W.P (C) No.24 of 2013 and Misc. Case No.5716 of 2013 order dated 20.3.2013. In view of above, we admit these

ALFA TRANSFORMERS LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 446/CTK/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Apr 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Kuldip Singhassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Prajna Raj Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Tigga, DR
Section 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37

37 of the Act. Such expenditures before qualifying for deduction, are required to be laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business and profession. But expenditures in the nature of capital expenditures or personal expenses of the assessee are not admissible under the said section. However, we find that issue raised by the Revenue

DHANESWAR RATH INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND MEDICAL SCIENCES,CUTTACK vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 134/CTK/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 May 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri D.Parida/C.ParidaFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Goutam
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 263

37,10,317/-, depreciation of Rs.4,77,03,665/-, excess of income over expenditure has been declared at Rs.88,67,076/- . In Form 10B, the amount of income of the previous year applied to charitable or religious purposes in India has been declared at Rs.88,67,076/-. In this regard, attention is invited to the judicial pronouncement in the case

JCIT, RANGE-1, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR vs. PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LTD., BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue (ITA No

ITA 354/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack12 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.354/Ctk/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Vs M/S Paradeep Phosphates Limited, Bhubaneswar Bayan Bhawan, J.N.Marg, Kharvel Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.10/Ctk/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.354/Ctk/2019) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Paradeep Phosphates Limited, Vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bayan Bhawan, J.N.Marg, Kharvel Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.326/Ctk/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Paradeep Phosphates Limited, Vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bayan Bhawan, J.N.Marg, Kharvel Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri A.K.Sabat & B.K.Mahapatra, Cas राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Sabat & B.K.Mahapatra, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

37(1) the IT. Act. (iv) The appellant craves to alter, amend or add any other ground that may be considered necessary in course of the appeal proceedings. 3. At the time of hearing, ld.AR withdrew the cross objection filed by the assessee against the appeal of the revenue in ITA No.354/CTK/2019. Accordingly, the cross objection filed by the assessee

PARADEEP PHOSPATES LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue (ITA No

ITA 326/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack12 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.354/Ctk/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Vs M/S Paradeep Phosphates Limited, Bhubaneswar Bayan Bhawan, J.N.Marg, Kharvel Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) & Cross Objection No.10/Ctk/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No.354/Ctk/2019) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Paradeep Phosphates Limited, Vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bayan Bhawan, J.N.Marg, Kharvel Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.326/Ctk/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) M/S Paradeep Phosphates Limited, Vs Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Bayan Bhawan, J.N.Marg, Kharvel Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751001 Pan No. : Aabcp 3276 D (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri A.K.Sabat & B.K.Mahapatra, Cas राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Sabat & B.K.Mahapatra, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

37(1) the IT. Act. (iv) The appellant craves to alter, amend or add any other ground that may be considered necessary in course of the appeal proceedings. 3. At the time of hearing, ld.AR withdrew the cross objection filed by the assessee against the appeal of the revenue in ITA No.354/CTK/2019. Accordingly, the cross objection filed by the assessee

ACIT, , SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 219/CTK/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.219/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2019-2020) Acit, Sambalpur Vs Smt. Indrani Patnaik, A-6, Comercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela Pan No. :Accpp 6164 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.C.Bhadra, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/08/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 29.03.2023, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.Bhubaneswar-2/10625/2018-19 For The Assessment Year 2019-2020, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Made Towards Peripheral Development Charges Of Rs. 49,49,231/- As Such Expenditure Is Not Allowable As Per The Provisions Of Section 37 Of The Act. 2. The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 10,69,56,849/- U/S 14A As The Assessee Has Exempt Income During The Year. 3. The Cit(A) Was Not Correct In Deleting The Addition U/S 14A Holding That Satisfaction Is Not Recorded By The Ao, When The Assessee Has Not Suomoto Disallowed Any Expenditure Related To Earning Exempt Income As Decided By The Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Maxopp Investment Ltd Dtd 12.02.2018. 4. The Cit(A) Was Not Correct In Deleting The Addition U/S 14A, When The Ao Has Given A Finding In The Assessment Order That The Assessee Has Shown Investment That Yielded Tax Free

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 135Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 37Section 37(1)

37 of the Act. 2. The CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 10,69,56,849/- u/s 14A as the assessee has exempt income during the year. 3. The CIT(A) was not correct in deleting the addition u/s 14A holding that satisfaction is not recorded by the AO, when the assessee has not suomoto disallowed

KANDOI AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,CUTTACK vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 183/CTK/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvocteFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 24(1)Section 263Section 57

Section 37 of the Act, the AO is under obligation to 6 examine these expenses and if the same were for the purpose of business, the same deserves to be allowed. In the instant case these expenses were allowed after making verification in the order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act and the ld Pr.CIT in revisionary order u/s.263

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 469/CTK/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

37 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur context of grant of exemption u/s.80G of the Income tax Act, : 961, but the interpretations will hold good in the context of the provisions of Section lO(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961 also. In the present case, the objects of the Trust very clearly show that

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 266/CTK/2019[2008--09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

37 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur context of grant of exemption u/s.80G of the Income tax Act, : 961, but the interpretations will hold good in the context of the provisions of Section lO(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961 also. In the present case, the objects of the Trust very clearly show that

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 471/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

37 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur context of grant of exemption u/s.80G of the Income tax Act, : 961, but the interpretations will hold good in the context of the provisions of Section lO(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961 also. In the present case, the objects of the Trust very clearly show that

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 262/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

37 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur context of grant of exemption u/s.80G of the Income tax Act, : 961, but the interpretations will hold good in the context of the provisions of Section lO(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961 also. In the present case, the objects of the Trust very clearly show that

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

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 265/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

37 -: ITA No. 368/CTK/2019 and others Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berahampur context of grant of exemption u/s.80G of the Income tax Act, : 961, but the interpretations will hold good in the context of the provisions of Section lO(23C)(vi) of the Income tax Act, 1961 also. In the present case, the objects of the Trust very clearly show that