VICKY NAVANI,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), JABALPUR, WARD )), JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1), Trivandrum [2020] 114 taxmann.com 18 (Kerala) IT Appeal No. 320 of 2019 dated JANUARY 7, 2020, wherein it was held that "Mere fact that audit of assessee was conducted under provisions of Co-operative Societies Act, would not be sufficient for such compliance under section 44AB, unless report of audit is furnished in prescribed form accompanied with a further

JABALPUR ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEXES PRIVATE LIMITED,JABALPUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU & DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

10B(8) of the Act was mandatory, but the time limit within the declaration could be filed was not mandatory but was directory. The Court had held that this was erroneous because it was contrary to the unambiguous language contained in the section. Accordingly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had held that the twin condition of furnishing a declaration before

SHARDA BAL KALYAN SAMITI,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

1. That the NFAC has grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to confirmed the income at Rs. 30,41,925/against the returned income at Rs. NIL. 2 That the assessment proceeding completed after regularizing the original notice issued U/s 148 of IT Act, 1961, dated 31/03/2021 after issue of notice U/s 148A of IT Act, 1961, dated

SHARDA BAL KALYAN SAMITI,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

1. That the NFAC has grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to confirmed the income at Rs. 30,41,925/against the returned income at Rs. NIL. 2 That the assessment proceeding completed after regularizing the original notice issued U/s 148 of IT Act, 1961, dated 31/03/2021 after issue of notice U/s 148A of IT Act, 1961, dated

SHARDA BAL KALYAN SAMITI,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

1. That the NFAC has grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to confirmed the income at Rs. 30,41,925/against the returned income at Rs. NIL. 2 That the assessment proceeding completed after regularizing the original notice issued U/s 148 of IT Act, 1961, dated 31/03/2021 after issue of notice U/s 148A of IT Act, 1961, dated

SHARDA BAL KALYAN SAMITI,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

1. That the NFAC has grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to confirmed the income at Rs. 30,41,925/against the returned income at Rs. NIL. 2 That the assessment proceeding completed after regularizing the original notice issued U/s 148 of IT Act, 1961, dated 31/03/2021 after issue of notice U/s 148A of IT Act, 1961, dated

SHRI NAMIYUN PARSWANATH JAIN, SWETAMBER MANIDHARI TRUST,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), JABALPUR

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes”

1. That the commissioner Appeals faceless erred in not condoning the delay in filling 10B audit report up loaded belatedly by C.A. on 26.02.2020, whereas it was signed by C.A. on 20.06.2018 and the assesse dully added C. A for up loading Sri Namiyun Paraswanath Jain Swetamber Manidhari Trust. Jabalpur . on 03.08.2018, ITR was filed on 06.08.2018, thus the audit

I M C OF ITI ,GOTEGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), JABALPURAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Imc Of Iti,Gotegaon, Vs. Ito (Exemption) Annex Bldg, Mission Jabalpur, Chowk, Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh- Madhya Pradesh- 482001. 482001. Pan/Gir No. : Aaaai2999F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rahul Bardia. Fca.Ar Respondentby : Shri Shiv Kumar. Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Are The Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) / Cit(A) Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Act.

1. That the CIT(appeals) erred in rejecting the claim of refund of Rs. 69290/- on the basis of alleged non-filling of ITR whereas the assesse claiming exempt income u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) also being substantially financed by the Govt., without referring section 139(4) (e), which require filling of ITR mandatory w.e.f 1.4.2016 i.e. from