STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ODISHA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARAD 5(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed and stay petition stands dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwals.P.No.11/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year :2017-18 State Pollution Control Board State Pollution Control Board, Vs. Ito, Ward 5(2), Plot No.A-118, Paribesh Bhawan, 118, Paribesh Bhawan, Bhubaneswar Nilakantha Nagar, Agar, Nayapali, Nayapali, Unit-Vii, Bhubaneswar Neswar Pan/Gir No.Aaals 2490 J Aaals 2490 J (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ca Walla, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/10/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/10/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

disallowed under s. 40A(3)—Smt. Sapna Sanjay Raisoni vs. ITO (2016) 179 TTJ 34 (Pune)(Trib) followed.” In the case of “Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education Vs. ITO, (2019) 176 ITD 47 (Mumbai)” the Hon’ble Mumbai Bench of ITAT it was held that; There is complete control of the State Government over the affairs of the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance\nof deduction of expenditure since the whole activity was illegal.\n23. In the premises, the impugned notice issued by the Assessing\nOfficer under Section 148 of the Act cannot be sustained and must be\nset aside.\n24. The following companion writ petitions, Writ Petition Nos.1015,\n1016

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance\nof deduction of expenditure since the whole activity was illegal.\n23. In the premises, the impugned notice issued by the Assessing\nOfficer under Section 148 of the Act cannot be sustained and must be\nset aside.\n24. The following companion writ petitions, Writ Petition Nos.1015,\n1016

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance\nof deduction of expenditure since the whole activity was illegal.\n23. In the premises, the impugned notice issued by the Assessing\nOfficer under Section 148 of the Act cannot be sustained and must be\nset aside.\n24. The following companion writ petitions, Writ Petition Nos.1015,\n1016

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR vs. SMT. INDRANI PATNAIK, ROURKELA

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance\nof deduction of expenditure since the whole activity was illegal.\n23. In the premises, the impugned notice issued by the Assessing\nOfficer under Section 148 of the Act cannot be sustained and must be\nset aside.\n24. The following companion writ petitions, Writ Petition Nos.1015,\n1016

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

section 139(8A) of the Act which is a specific provision for fling the return of income belatedly within 24 months from the end of the assessment year. 04. That taking advantage of the delay committed by the assessee in filing the Audit Report in Form No. 10B within the due time, the Assessing Officer disallowed

PUBLIC SCHOOL,PHULBANI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, BERHAMPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowed. Further, the entire annual receipts have been treated as income. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the appeal of the assessee following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Wipro Ltd., reported in [2022] 140 taxmann.com 223 (SC), wherein it has been held that while interpreting the provisions of section 10B

PRAGATI CHARITABLE TRUST,PURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.525/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Pragati Charitable Trust Vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Plot No-66 Gyana Viahr, Ward, Bhubaneswar Gopinathpur B.O Dhauli Hills Puri, 751002 Pan No. :Aaqpn 2087 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K. Mishra,Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/12/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Addl/ Jcit (A)-5, Chennai, Dated 05/12/2024, In Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1070904602(1) Having Appeal No. Addl/Jcit(A)-5, Chennai/10003/2014-15 For The Assessment Year 2015- 2016. 2. The Assesee Has Challenged The Appellate Order On The Strength Of The Following Grounds Appeal:- 1. For That, When The Learned A.O. Has No Power & Authority To Determine The Income Of The Assessee Trust, Treating The Entire Gross Receipt As Income, While Processing The Return U/S.143(1) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2015-16, The Learned Cit(A) Has Committed Gross Error Of Law In Confirming The Said Order, As Such, Order Passed By The Learned Cit(A) As Well As By The Learned A.O., Being Not Sustainable In The Eye Of Law, Needs To Be Quashed In The Interest Of Justice

section 12A of the Act. Since the Form 10B was not filed within the stipulated time limit, CPC while processing the return of income, has disallowed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD.,BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

ASST. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SAMBALPUR vs. SHREE BALAJI ENGICON LIMITED, BELPAHAR RS

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

M/S. SHREE BAALAJI ENGICONS LIMITED,JHARSUGUDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR vs. M/S. SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD., JHARSUGUDA

In the result, appeals of the assesee in IT(SS)A No

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalit(Ss)A No.77/Ctk/2023

Section 80IA(4) of the Act the enterprises which is eligible for deduction is the “joint venture firm” and not any of the constituent as has been claimed by the assesee. 27. In the last, it is observed that in the case of M/s Rawat-Balaji-JV and M/s SBEPL-GRIL-JV in A.Y.2014-2015, the department proposed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( EXEMPTIONS), BHUBANESWAR vs. NABAJUGA EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST, DHENKANAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.127/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Dy. Cit(Exemptions), Vs Nabajuga Educational & Bhubaneswar Charitable Trust, Flat No.N/4-208, Irc Village, Khorda-751015 Pan No. : Aaatn 7735 R & Cross Objection No.03/Ctk/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.127/Ctk/2022) (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Nabajuga Educational & Vs Dy. Cit(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar Charitable Trust, Flat No.N/4-208, Irc Village, Khorda-751015 Pan No. : Aaatn 7735 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

10B and grant the assessee the benefit of exemption u/s.11 of the 3 & CO No.03 /CTK/2022 Act. It was the submission that the CBDT has issued Circular No.2/2020, dated 03.01.2020, wherein for the assessment year 2018-2019, the power to condone the delay upto 365 days has been granted only to the Commissioner of Income Tax u/s.119

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Section 139 of the Act. In the present case, as it is noticed that the Form 10B has 4 been filed before the due date of filing of the return u/s.139(1) of the Act, therefore, the disallowance

NABA UTKAL TRUST,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Am आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.268/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2021-2022) Naba Utkal Trust, Vs Ito, Exemption, Bhubaneswar Plot No.841, Keshab Complex, Cuttack Road, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar-751010 Pan No. : Aabtn 0126 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order, Dated 28.12.2024 Passed By The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A), Panaji, For The Assessment Year 2021-2022. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 60 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein That The Delay Of 60 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Is Due To Lack Of Knowledge About The Order Passed By The Ld.Pcit. Accordingly, The Assessee Prayed That The Delay Of 60 Days May Kindly Be Condoned & Appeal Of The Assessee May Kindly Be Admitted For Hearing. Ld. Sr. Dr Did Not Raise Any Objection To This Contention Of The Assessee For Condonation Of Delay. Accordingly, We Are Of The View That The Assessee

section 119(2) of the Act and decide on merits. However, while deciding the appeal of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee stating that the ld. CIT(A) has no power to condone the delay for late filing of Form 10B. 4. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in further appeal before