DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

disallowance of exemption should have been made in light of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 13 of the Act are reproduced below. Section 13 (1) Nothing contained in section 11 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

disallowance of exemption should have been made in light of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 13 of the Act are reproduced below. Section 13 (1) Nothing contained in section 11 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2 (1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. JAYMAHAKALI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, WARDHA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

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

disallowance of exemption should have been made in light of provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with section 13(3) of the Act. The relevant provisions of section 13 of the Act are reproduced below. Section 13 (1) Nothing contained in section 11 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year

C-DET EXPLOSIVE INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD.,,NAGPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2,, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue (ITA/42/2020) is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

2. Hence, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 6. Ground Nos. 3 and 4 raised by the assessee challenging the action of CIT(A) in confirming the action of AO in disallowing the claim of deduction u/s. 35(1)(ii) of the Act. 7. We note that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing

C-DET EXPLOSIVE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD ,NAGPUR vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue (ITA/42/2020) is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

2. Hence, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 6. Ground Nos. 3 and 4 raised by the assessee challenging the action of CIT(A) in confirming the action of AO in disallowing the claim of deduction u/s. 35(1)(ii) of the Act. 7. We note that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing

C-DET EXPLOSIVE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD ,NAGPUR vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue (ITA/42/2020) is dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

2. Hence, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 6. Ground Nos. 3 and 4 raised by the assessee challenging the action of CIT(A) in confirming the action of AO in disallowing the claim of deduction u/s. 35(1)(ii) of the Act. 7. We note that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

disallowing the claim stating that the assessee failed to provide cogent and convincing reply to the allegations raised. We observe from the record that in identical situation the Coordinate Bench of ITAT in ITA Nos. 4843 & 1228/Mum/2018 for Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 in the case of Ramprasad Agrawal Vrs. ITO (reported in [2018] 100 taxman.com 172 - Mum Trib

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

disallowing the claim stating that the assessee failed to provide cogent and convincing reply to the allegations raised. We observe from the record that in identical situation the Coordinate Bench of ITAT in ITA Nos. 4843 & 1228/Mum/2018 for Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 in the case of Ramprasad Agrawal Vrs. ITO (reported in [2018] 100 taxman.com 172 - Mum Trib

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

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

disallowing the claim stating that the assessee failed to provide cogent and convincing reply to the allegations raised. We observe from the record that in identical situation the Coordinate Bench of ITAT in ITA Nos. 4843 & 1228/Mum/2018 for Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 in the case of Ramprasad Agrawal Vrs. ITO (reported in [2018] 100 taxman.com 172 - Mum Trib

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

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. MS GONDWANA ENGINEERS LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

disallowance u/s.36(i)(va). 2. Any other grounds and fact to be raised at the time of hearing with the permission of Hon'ble ITAT.” 2 M/s. Gondwana Engineers Ltd. ITA no.387/Nag./2024 3. The tax effect is only ` 1,91,350, as against limit of ` 60 lakh. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that there is a Revenue Audit Objection

BHAKTVATSAL SADGURU YOGIRAJ VASANTRAO GOPALRAO GHONGE MAHARAJ TRUST,WARDHA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

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

Section 12A of the 1.T. Act, 1961 and also under the Public Trust Act. 2. In assessment order, addition is made by denying the exemption u/s 11 of the Act and disallowing

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

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

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

12A (column A19 of Part A of the return of income), all this confusion was created and led to a disallowance of the entire exemption claimed u/s 11A. Moreover, though the proceedings are being conducted for the final registration and as soon as the appellant gets that order it shall be submitted before your kindness, the appellant trust was still

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

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in making and the CIT(A) erred in confirming the adjustments made on account of 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

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

GAURISHANKAR SEWA SAMITI ,NANDURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, NAGPUR

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

2, Hyderabad”], for the assessment year 2021–22.\n2.\nThe assessee has raised following grounds:-\n“1) Learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing the Assessee's Appeal.\n2) Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the A.O.'s order without any basis.\n3) Learned A.O. erred in disallowing/not allowing the deduction amounting to\nRs.5,81,55,514/-.\n4) Learned