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

disallowance pertaining to delay in filing of Form 10 cannot be treated as a prima facie adjustment for the purposes of intimation under section 143(1)(a). Ground No. 2: When Rs. 10,45,000/- has been actually set apart under section 11(2) and reported in Form 10B

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

disallowance pertaining to delay in filing of Form 10 cannot be treated as a prima facie adjustment for the purposes of intimation under section 143(1)(a). Ground No. 2: When Rs. 10,45,000/- has been actually set apart under section 11(2) and reported in Form 10B

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

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

10B(8), within the time limit prescribed u/s 139(1) of Income tax Act and claim of carry forward losses. But the ratio of the aforesaid judgment is squarely applicable on the facts of the instant case as in para 11 of its judgment the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that “As per the settled position

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

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

10B within the due time, the Assessing Officer disallowed deduction of the whole of the amount of Rs. 9,58,96,328 applied in various projects and computed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 10,13,15,635 and raised a demand in the total amount of Rs. 6,99,70,607 in the Intimation under section

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

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed

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 of ACIT vs Grama Vidiyal Trust, reported in 71 taxmann.com 88, the ITAT, Chennai ‘D’ Bench held that where the cost of asset

M/S. SUPRATIVA,CUTTACK vs. ITO WARD-2(2), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.308/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) M/S Suprativa, Vs Ito, Ward-2(2), Cuttack Fakirpada, Cuttack-754100 Pan No. :Aasas 9915 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Pradeep Kumar Pattnaik, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/12/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 10.08.2023, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1055034411(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld Ar That The Assessee Is A Society Registered U/S.12A Of The Act. It Was The Further Submission That Form 10B Was Filed Belatedly. It Was The Submission That When The Return Of Income Was Filed By The Assessee, The Same Was Processed By Issuance Of Intimation U/S.143(1) Of The Act, Wherein The Entire Expenditure Claimed By The Assessee Was Disallowed By Raising A Demand Of Rs.5,89,164/-. On Appeal, The Ld. Cit(A) Upheld The Adjustment Done By The Ld. Ao On Account Of Belatedly Filing Of Form 10B By The Assessee. Consequently, The Ld. Cit(A) Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee. It Was The Submission That The Assessee Has Not Received Any Show Cause Notice

disallowed by raising a demand of Rs.5,89,164/-. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the adjustment done by the ld. AO on account of belatedly filing of Form 10B by the assessee. Consequently, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee has not received any show cause notice

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(8) requiring

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

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 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

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 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

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

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 the expenditure claimed as application against the income/ receipt, which order was confirmed by the JCIT(A). Thus, the present appeal has been filed before us. 4. It is submitted by the assessee that