BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

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

20,00,000/- and deposited cash worth Rs.6,10,520/-. Since the assessee had not filed returns in any of these years, notices under section 148 were issued to it. The assessee made due compliance to the notices under section 148. It filed a return for the A.Y. 2013-14 on 21.05.2021 declaring gross total income of Rs.29

MANGALAYATAN UNIVERSITY,JABALPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXCEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, ITA No. 46/JAB/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes while

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

delay may kindly be condoned as it was caused due to reasonable and sufficient cause. 3. We have duly considered the matter. As the issue is the grant of approval under section 80G, which emanates out of a common order, it is plausible that the same could lead to a belief that a separate appeal was not necessary. Hence, considering

MANGALAYATAN UNIVERSITY,MANDLA ROAD, NEAR SHARDA DEVI MANDIR, RICHAI BAREL vs. LD. CIT (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, MADHYA PRADESH

In the result, ITA No. 46/JAB/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes while

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

delay may kindly be condoned as it was caused due to reasonable and sufficient cause. 3. We have duly considered the matter. As the issue is the grant of approval under section 80G, which emanates out of a common order, it is plausible that the same could lead to a belief that a separate appeal was not necessary. Hence, considering

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)

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 the appeals have been filed on a common issue, therefore, they are being taken up together for the sake of convenience. The grounds of appeal

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)

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 the appeals have been filed on a common issue, therefore, they are being taken up together for the sake of convenience. The grounds of appeal

ATHITHEYAM NYAS,ANUPPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) BHOPAL,, BHOPAL

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

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.-Na Athitheyam Nyas, Vs. Commissioner Of Income-Tax C/O Kalyan Sewa Ashram, Amraknatk (Exemption), Bhopal Dt-Anuppur, M.P. 484886 Pan:Aakta1783A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. P.C. Bardia & Sh. Rahul Bardia, C.As. Revenue By: Sh. Shravan Kumar Meena, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit (Exemption), Bhopal Wherein The Ld. Cit (Exemption) Has Rejected The Application Filed By The Assessee In Form No. 10Ab For Registration Under Section 12B Of The Income Tax Act. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That Without Considering The Reply E Filed/Mailed Dated 20.03.2024, The Cit(Exemp) Erred In Cancelling The Provisional Registration Granted On 28.11.2023 & Rejecting 10Ab Form For Permanent Registration Vide Order Dated 21.03.2025 Due To Non-Submission Of Reply To Notice Dated 13.03.2025 Up To 18.03.2025 Alleging: - 1. Failure To Explain The Reason For Delay In Filling Form 10Ab Without Considering Fresh/Corrected 10Ab Form Filed On 18.03.2025 U/S 12A(Ac)(1)(Vi)(B) Under New Law. 2. Not Justifying Dissolution Clause No. 23 Allowing Use Of Funds By The Settlors/Trustees- Without Referring Clause No. 19,20, 21 & 22 Of The Trust Deed. 3. The Trust Is Irrevocable- Not Correct-Without Referring Irrevocable Clause No. 19 Of The Trust Deed.

20, 21 and 22 of the trust deed. 3. The trust is irrevocable- not correct-without referring irrevocable clause No. 19 of the trust deed. 1 Athitheyam Nyas 4. The trust running hotel on commercial basis and not a Dharmashala for charitable purpose-without referring trust Registration order etc. 2. That the CIT (Exemp) erred in rejecting the application filed

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

20 05 2025 Date of pronouncement: 21 05 2025 O 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

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 (3), JABALPUR vs. SHRI VINOD KUMAR CHATE, JABALPUR

section 50C. In fact, the land had been awarded to the assessee’s father (MC) in 1961 by the State Government, even as the title deed was executed only in 1987. The date of acquisition by him and, thus, the assessee (s. 49), is prior to 1981, so that it is the fair market value (fmv) as on 1.4.1981 that

SHRI VINOD KUMAR CHATE,JABALPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, JABALPUR

section 50C. In fact, the land had been awarded to the assessee’s father (MC) in 1961 by the State Government, even as the title deed was executed only in 1987. The date of acquisition by him and, thus, the assessee (s. 49), is prior to 1981, so that it is the fair market value (fmv) as on 1.4.1981 that