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”

D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) /CIT(A) passed u/sec 154 and 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the commissioner Appeals faceless erred in not condoning the delay in filling 10B audit report

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

d with a further report by an Accountant in prescribed form, and also failed to prove that there existed any reasonable cause for such failure, order of penalty under section 27IB was justified-Held, yes [Paras 6 and 9][In favour of revenue]" As the facts of this case are exactly like one quoted above wherein it has been held

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

D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This bunch of four appeals by the assessee in ITA. Nos. 158 & 159/JAB/2023, pertaining to the A.Y. 2016-17 and ITA. Nos. 160 & 161/JAB/2023, pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 against the different orders of learned Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred as the “Ld.CIT(A)”]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) all 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

D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This bunch of four appeals by the assessee in ITA. Nos. 158 & 159/JAB/2023, pertaining to the A.Y. 2016-17 and ITA. Nos. 160 & 161/JAB/2023, pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 against the different orders of learned Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred as the “Ld.CIT(A)”]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) all 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

D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This bunch of four appeals by the assessee in ITA. Nos. 158 & 159/JAB/2023, pertaining to the A.Y. 2016-17 and ITA. Nos. 160 & 161/JAB/2023, pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 against the different orders of learned Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred as the “Ld.CIT(A)”]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) all 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

D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This bunch of four appeals by the assessee in ITA. Nos. 158 & 159/JAB/2023, pertaining to the A.Y. 2016-17 and ITA. Nos. 160 & 161/JAB/2023, pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 against the different orders of learned Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred as the “Ld.CIT(A)”]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) all dated

JAGDISH PRASAD AGRAWAL,SEONI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, SEONI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

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

D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. Both the appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 23.05.2023 for the assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18, wherein the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed both appeals for statistical purposes. As both

JAGDISH PRASAD AGRAWAL,SEONI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, SEONI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

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

D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. Both the appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 23.05.2023 for the assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18, wherein the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed both appeals for statistical purposes. As both

SEHKARI VIPDAN SAMITI MARYADIT,NARSINGHPUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. These four appeals have been filed against the various orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC dismissing its appeals against orders passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 and orders passed dismissing the appeals filed by the assessee against

SEHKARI VIPDAN SAMITI MARYADIT,NARSINGHPUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. These four appeals have been filed against the various orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC dismissing its appeals against orders passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 and orders passed dismissing the appeals filed by the assessee against

SEHKARI VIPDAN SAMITI MARYADIT,NARSINGHPUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. These four appeals have been filed against the various orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC dismissing its appeals against orders passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 and orders passed dismissing the appeals filed by the assessee against

SEHKARI VIPDAN SAMITI MARYADIT,NARSINGHPUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. These four appeals have been filed against the various orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC dismissing its appeals against orders passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 and orders passed dismissing the appeals filed by the assessee against

PRAGYA SAVITA,JABALPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 2(1) ,JABALPUR , JABALUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2021-22 Pragya Savita, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of 1197-A, Sadar, Modi Bada, Cantt, Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh-482001 Jabalpur Pan:Axyps7485A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Ashok Tiwari, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.05.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Jcit(A)-2, Vadodara Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 27.10.2023, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee That Was Filed Against The Order Of The Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru Under Section 143(1) Dated 17.12.2022. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Learned Cit (A) Nafc Was Wrong In Law For Not Allowing The Deduction For Payment Of Rs. 56,39,017/- Under Section 36(1)(Vi) On Account Of Employee Contribution Of Epf & Esic Amount. Whereas The Assessee Had Deposited The Employee Contribution Of Epf & Esic On Or Before Due Date For Furnishing Return Of Income Under Sub-Section (1) Of Section 139 Of Income Tax Act, 1961. Employer Is Entitled For Deduction. 2. That The Both Employee Contribution Epf Rs.49,38,777/- & Esic Rs.70,0240/- Total Rs. 59,39,107/-Which Has Been Deposited With A Small Delay Due To Unavoidable Circumstances & Covid-19. Whereas The Assessee Had Deposited The Employee Contribution Before Filing Of The Return.

D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. JCIT(A)-2, Vadodara under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 27.10.2023, dismissing the appeal of the assessee that was filed against the order of the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru under section 143(1) dated

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER , CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE ,JABALPUR vs. ITO (TDS)-2, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, hence are clubbed, heard and consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up the ITA No.4/JAB/2023 for the A.Y.2013-14(Quarter-4) as a lead case and the facts narrated. The assessee has raised the following grounds

SAURABH JAIN,SAGAR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE,, SAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH “SMC”, JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.42/JAB/2025 Assessment year:2012-13 Shri Saurabh Jain Vs. A.C.I.T., Ward No. 11, Karrapur Circle- Sagar Sagar. Sagar PAN:ASDPJ3438L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Dhiraj Ghai, C.A. Respondent by Shri N. M. Prasad, Sr.D.R. O R D

CHIEF MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICE ANNUPPUR,ANNUPPUR vs. ITO-TDS-2,JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 & 89/Jab/2023 (A.Y: 2014-15 To 2019-20) Chief Medical & Vs. Ito, Tds-2, Health Office, Room No. 102, Aayakar Amarkant Road, Bhawan, Napier Town, Annuppur-484224, Jabalpur-482001, Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh.

D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: These are the six appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/CIT (A) Delhi passed U/Sec 201(1) & Sec 201(1A) and 250 of the Act. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay

GOSAL SAGAR HELPING HAND FOUNDATION,JABALPUR vs. CIT EXCEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2024-25 Gosal Sagar Helping Hand Cit Exemption V. Foundation Income Tax Department, C/O Mujahid Ansari & Co., Cit Exemptions, Bhopal Mominpura Street, Gohalpur- (Mp). 482002. Pan:Aagag6146G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21 05 2025 O R D E R

D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, filed by the assessee, against the impugned order dated 08/06/2023 of learned Commissioner Income Tax (Exemption), Bhopal [hereinafter referred as to “Ld.CIT(E)”] rejecting the application of the assessee for registration u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the assessment year

SHRI KAMLA JANHITYA SAMITI,SATNA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 03/03/2021, refusing to condone the delay in filing of Form-10, i.e., for availing exemption u/ss. 11 & 12 of the Act. 2. The ld. CIT (Exemptions) has, in exercise of its power u/s. 119(2)(b), refused to condone the delay inasmuch as the same