HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

4) or in response to 142(1)is not made under section 80A(5) of the IT Act 1961. The claim under section 80P is made in the return of income filed and therefore it should be allowed. Additionally, there is no specific disallowance of claim made under section 80P of the I.T Act, 1961 for belated returns or return

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

4) or in response to 142(1)is not made under section 80A(5) of the IT Act 1961. The claim under section 80P is made in the return of income filed and therefore it should be allowed. Additionally, there is no specific disallowance of claim made under section 80P of the I.T Act, 1961 for belated returns or return

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

4) or in response to 142(1)is not made under section 80A(5) of the IT Act 1961. The claim under section 80P is made in the return of income filed and therefore it should be allowed. Additionally, there is no specific disallowance of claim made under section 80P of the I.T Act, 1961 for belated returns or return

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

4) or in response to 142(1)is not made under section 80A(5) of the IT Act 1961. The claim under section 80P is made in the return of income filed and therefore it should be allowed. Additionally, there is no specific disallowance of claim made under section 80P of the I.T Act, 1961 for belated returns or return

SUNIL NARAYANDAS KHATOD ,AKOLA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.134/Nag/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sunil Narayndas Khatod, The Commissioner Of Nagpuri Gin Compound, Vs Income Tax-1, Behind Old Cotton Market, Nagpur. Nagpur – 444001. Pan: Adepk3087C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajesh V.Loya – Ca Revenue By Shri Kailash G. Kanojiya – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2023

disallowed out of Brokerage Expenses. The Ld.Pr.CIT invoked jurisdiction u/s 263 on the ground that the AO had not referred the case to the Transfer Pricing Officer though one of the reasons for selection of the case for scrutiny was ‘Large Specifies Domestic Transactions’, which according the Ld.Pr.CIT was mandatory as per the provisions of the Act and CBDT instruction

SATPUDA FOUNDATION,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

disallowing the claim under section 11(2) of the Act. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before the first appellate authority. Satpuda Foundation ITA no.143/Nag./2021 4. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing as follows:– “Decision on Ground No.2, 3 & 4 The sum and substance of the above grounds of appeal is directed

HERD EDUCATIONAL & MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(3), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2023-24

disallowed by the CPC vide order dated 18.11.2024 u/s 143(1) of the Act, which was subsequently affirmed by the Ld. Commissioner vide order dated 20.01.2025 u/s 154 of the Act. 2 M/s. Herd Educational & Medical Research Foundation 3. The Assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the said disallowance/addition and/or aforesaid intimation/order by filing first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner

SHRI PANDURANG SANSTHAN DEULGAON MALI,MEHKAR vs. ITO WARD-2, EXEMP, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Pandurang Sansthan Ito (Exemption), Deulgaon Mali At Post Deulgaon Ward-2, Nagpur. Vs. Mahi, Mehkar-443001 Pan: Aagts 8497 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 139(4) of the Act and claimed exemption u/sec. 11 of the Act. Subsequently, the return filed by the Assessee was processed u/sec. 143(1) of the Act on dated 30/12/2020 by the CPC, whereby a demand of Rs. 3,82,168/- has been raised mainly on the ground that Form No. 10B was not filed electronically along with

DHARAMITRA,WARDHA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

section 11 on delayed filing of Form 10B is justified and valid in law, when the Hon’ble CBDT has condoned the delay for AY 2016-17 vide Circular No. 10/2019 dated 22nd May, 2019. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble CIT(A) was justified in upholding the disallowance made by CPC without

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) - 4, NAGPUR vs. DEENDAYAL SEVA PRATISHTHAN, YAVATMAL

In the result, appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

10B electronically one month prior to the due date for furnishing return of income under section 139(1). Hence, the exemption claimed in Sr.no. 2 [exemption claimed under section 11(1)(d)] and Sr.no. 4i to 4viii of Part B-TI is not allowable in accordance with the provisions of section 12A(1)(b) of the Act. The CPC disallowed

MANAV SEVA LOK KALYAN MAHASANGH,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE EXEMPTIOM, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roymanav Seva Lok Kalyan Vs Dcit/Acit, Circle Mahasangh, H.No. 32, Teka Exemption, Nagpur Naka, Asi Nagar, Nagpur. Pan : Aabtm 1643 C Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Hirani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.03.2026

disallowance of the benefit of income applied for charitable purposes apparently and allegedly by denying the benefit of exemption under section 11 and section 12 of the Act solely on account of belated filing in Form 10B ignoring the fact that the alleged delay was marginal and on account of circumstances beyond the control of the Appellant and which deserved

M/S BHAKTVASTAL SADGURU YOGIRAJ VASANTRAO GOPALRAO GHONGE MAHARAJ NYAS,,WARDHA vs. DY. C.I.T. CENTRL CIR.-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am 1) Ita No.: 040/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2011-12 2) Ita No.: 036/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2007-08 3) Ita No.: 037/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2008-09 4) Ita No.: 151/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2009-10 5) Ita No.: 152/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2010-11 6) Ita No.: 038/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2009-10 (143 R.W.S. 263) 7) Ita No.: 039/Nag/2017 - A.Y. 2010-11 (143 R.W.S. 263) Bhaktvastal Sadguru Yogiraj Vasantrao Vs. The Dcit Gopalrao Ghonge Maharaj Nyas Central Circle 2(2) Mukteshwar, Behind Rashtrabhasha Nagpur Gharpure Layout, Nagri Bank Colony Wardha Pan No.:Aabtb 2675 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Ca Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 26/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M.

10B submitted in terms of which assessee has applied income in excess of 85% during the year on objects of trust and thus income as shown in the return at NIL deserves to be accepted. (P. 4)” 7. The learned DR referred to various facts observed in assessment order. The learned DR placed strong reliance on the order of lower

SANT SHANKAR MAHARAJ AASHRAM,AMRAVATI vs. DCIT ACIT CIR-EXEMP, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

10B on 10/10/2016 before filing return of income for the assessment year under consideration. The return of income was filed by the assessee trust on 11/10/2018 declaring nil income after claiming exemption under section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). Statutory notices were issued by the Assessing Officer in response to which the assessee trust field partial

SHRIRAM GRAM VIKAS SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR EXEMP, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy

section 11(1)? If so, the details of the amount of income deemed to have been applied to charitable or religious purposes in India during the previous year, the Assessee has replied „Yes‟ and mentioned the amount of ₹ 1,24,56,743/– being an amount @ 11% of the total income from other sources to the tune