HARDA NAGAR BAL VIKAS SAMITI HARDA ,SARSWATI SHISHU MANDIR vs. ITO-1, HARDA, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms mentioned above

12A. Had such condition being there in clause (b) itself, then there was no need to insert a further clause (ba) by the Legislature for denying benefit ofsection 11 & 12 in case return is not filed in time as per provision of section 139 (4A) of the Act. It is relevant to note that clause (b) has not been amended

GOKULAM SEVA NYAS,1 RESHAM KENDRA ,GRAM KHAJURIYA SANWER vs. CIT EXEMPTION BHOPAL, ROOM NO:201,II FLOOR, REAC, BHOPAL, REAC, BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

B Govardhan v P Ragothaman, (2024) 10 SCC 613, the Court\nconsidered as under:\n'37. In Collector (LA) v. Katiji [Collector (LA) v. Katiji, (1987) 2\nSCC 107], the Court noted that it had been adopting a justifiably\nliberal approach in condoning delay and that “justice on merits” is to be\npreferred as against what “scuttles a decision

AKSHAY ACADEMY,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI, THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniakshay Academy Ito, Nfac 32 Kaimaidan Road, Delhi Khasgi Gagicha Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadta8987B Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

1) dated 17.06.2019 issued by CIT(Exemption), Bhopal. Ld. AR invited our attention to the copy of registration-order. Ld. AR then referred to the section 12A(2) which reads as under: “12A(2) Where an application has been made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, the provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall apply in relation

MADHYA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL FOUNDATION,POLOGROUND, INDUSTRIAL STATE vs. EXEMPTION WARD INDORE, MAIN BUILDING, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with\nhearing.\n4.\nWe have heard the learned Representatives of both sides and perused\nthe case record including the impugned orders.\n5.\nIn these matters, the assessee is aggrieved by the action of CIT(E) in\nrejecting assessee's applications for registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s\n80G. The Ld. CIT(E) has rejected

SHRI DANDI SEWA ASHRAM,ONKARESHWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION , BHOPAL

In the result the \"Impugned order\" is set aside as and by\nway of remand back to the file of the Ld

1) The provisions\nof section 11 and section 12 shall not apply in relation to the\nincome of any trust or institution unless the following conditions\nare fulfilled, namely:-\n(b) where the total income of the trust or institution as computed\nunder this Act without giving effect to the provisions of sections 11\nand 12 exceeds the maximum amount

SMT PUSHPLATA CHANDRAWAT,INDORE vs. THE DCIT CPC , BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Smt. Pushplata Chandrawat, V. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. House No. 34-Bg, Scheme No. 74-C, Vijay Nagar, Indore Pan-Adapc8144L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ca Respondent By: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2023

12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.” 3 Assessment Year. 2018-19 Smt. Pushplata Chandawat v. DCIT

SHRI GUPTNATH BAL SHIKSHAN SAMITI MACHALPUR,MACHALPUR vs. ITO WARD RAJGARH, RAJGARH

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in\nterms mentioned above

12A. Had such\ncondition being there in clause (b) itself, then there was no need\nto insert a further clause (ba) by the Legislature for denying\nbenefit ofsection 11 & 12 in case return is not filed in time as\nper provision of section 139 (4A) of the Act. It is relevant to note\nthat clause (b) has not been amended

M/S LAURELS SCHOOL AND MANAGEMENT INSTITUTION P.LTD.,INDORE vs. DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Laurels School & V. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. Management Institutions Pvt. Ltd. 7, Press Complex, A.B. Road, Behind Dainik Bhaskar Press, Indore. Pan-Aaacl4970D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ca Respondent By: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.04.2023

1), Indore. IV. It is further clarified that the period from 15-3-2020 till 28-2-2022 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

DEVI ANUSUIYA VIDYA SANSTHAN,INDORE vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

b)\nThe Audit Report [Form No. 10B] was also not filed within the\nstatutory period.\n(v) Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal but the CIT(A)\nrejected assessee's appeal and did not grant any relief.\n(vi) Now, the assessee has come before us by way of next appeal.\n3.\nLd. AR for assessee firstly addressed

MADHYA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL FOUNDATION,POLOGROUND, INDUSTRIAL STATE vs. EXEMPTION WARD INDORE, MAIN BUILDING, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with\nhearing.\n4.\nWe have heard the learned Representatives of both sides and perused\nthe case record including the impugned orders.\n5.\nIn these matters, the assessee is aggrieved by the action of CIT(E) in\nrejecting assessee's applications for registration u/s 12AB and approval u/s\n80G. The Ld. CIT(E) has rejected

ITO(EXEMPTION), INDORE vs. AROGYA SEVA MANDAL, BURHANPUR MADHYA PRADESH

Appeal is dismissed

condone such delays.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": [ "143(1)", "11", "12", "11/12", "139(1)", "12AB", "12A", "119(2)(b)" ], "issues": "Whether

ROSHNI HOMI DAJI BAHU UDDESHIYA SHIKSHA AVM SARVAJANIK NYAS,INDORE vs. CPC, BENGLURU, BENGLURU

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2023-24 Roshni Homi Daji Bahu Cpc, Bengaluru Uddeshiya Shiksha Avm Sarvajanik Nyas, बनाम/ 119, Kanlindi Kunj, Vs. Pipliyahana Square, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaetr9004R Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.09.2025

section 12A(1)(b)(ii). Accordingly, the AO denied benefit of exemption u/s 11 in toto and assessed the gross income of Rs. 1,03,26,610/- as taxable/total income and created demand of tax and interest. (vii) Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal but the CIT(A) rejected assessee’s appeal by following order: “5.7 In order

JIWAJI UNIVERSITY,GWALIOR vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

b) where the total income of the trust or institution as computed under this Act without giving effect to 31[the provisions of section 11 and section 12 exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax in any previous year], the accounts of the trust or institution for that year have been audited by an accountant

JIWAJI UNIVERSITY,GWALIOR vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

b) where the total income of the trust or institution as computed under this Act without giving effect to 31[the provisions of section 11 and section 12 exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax in any previous year], the accounts of the trust or institution for that year have been audited by an accountant

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. INDUS EDUCATION AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE, RAIPUR

Appeal is dismissed

12A(1)(b)", "143(1)", "11", "13(3)", "143(3)" ], "issues": "Whether the exemption under section 11 can be denied solely on the ground of delayed filing of the audit report in Form 10B when the delay was condoned

SHRI BHAWANI SHANKAR PARASHAR,INDORE vs. THE DCIT/ACIT 1 (2), INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Bhawani Shankar Pr. Cit-1 Prashar Indore 28, Lasudia Mori, Vijay Vs. Nagar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bgbpp 2475 G Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.” 9. Rest of the delay in filing the appeal is explained

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BHOPOAL, BHOPAL vs. M/S RASHTRIYA TAKNIKI SHIKSHAK PRASHIKSHAN EVAM ANUNSANDHAN SANSTHAN, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit Circle-1(1) M/S. Rashtriya Takniki Bhopal Shikshak Prashikshan Evam Anunsandhan Sansthan बनाम/ Samiti, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aabar2266H Assessee By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Shri Vinod Joshi, Ar Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2025

condoned taking into account the revenue’s solemn averments made in the affidavit to the effect that owning to engagements of AO and his subordinate staff in completing cases of assessments and re-assessments, there occurred delay. We follow the landmark judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others

PRASAM RAKESH CHOUDHARY,GIRNAR SOCIETY, BAPURAO GALLI, ITWARI, NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, BHOPAL , BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit Circle-1(1) M/S. Rashtriya Takniki Bhopal Shikshak Prashikshan Evam Anunsandhan Sansthan बनाम/ Samiti, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aabar2266H Assessee By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Shri Vinod Joshi, Ar Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2025

condoned taking into account the revenue’s solemn averments made in the affidavit to the effect that owning to engagements of AO and his subordinate staff in completing cases of assessments and re-assessments, there occurred delay. We follow the landmark judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others