DEARHOOD FOUNDATION,BELAGAVI vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. No.202/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2022-23 ) Dear Hood Foundation, Ddit, Vs. Plot.No.1/S,Kanbargi Cpc, Industrial Area, Bengaluru-560500. Kanabargi.S.O, Karnataka. Belgaum-590015, Karnataka. Pan/Gir No. Aaicd1005D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By Shri.Pramod Y Vaidya.Ar Revenue By Shri.Sanket Deshmukh.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 23.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm:

exemption u/sec11 of the Act. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR brought to the knowledge of the bench, that there is a delay of 164 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed an affidavit for condonation

ZUARI INDUSTRIES LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ZUARI GLOBAL LTD),ZUARINAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.71/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2018-19 ) Zuari Industries Limited, Vs National Faceless Jai Kisaan Bhawan, Assessment Centre, Zuarinagar, Delhi. Mormugo, Goa-403728. Pan/Gir No. Aaacz0306P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Ankit Goyal.Ar Revenue By Shri.Captain Pradeep Arya.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 10.06.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 11.06.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi /Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A) Sustaining The Disallowance U/Sec14Aof The Act & Not Condoning The Delay In Filling The Appeal. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assesse Company Is Engaged In The Business. The Assesse Has Filed The Return Of Income For A.Y.2018-19 On 29.11.2018 Disclosing

condoning the delay in filling the appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assesse company is engaged in the business. The assesse has filed the return of income for A.Y.2018-19 on 29.11.2018 disclosing 2 ITA. No.71/PAN/2025 Zuari Industries Limited. a total income of Rs.5,86,00,220/- and the return of income was processed u/sec143

RAJA BHAT AND KUMUDA FOUNDATION,BELAGAVI vs. PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BELAGAVI

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2022-23 Raja Bhat & Kumuda Foundation Plot No. 4, Rs No1368, Kumudini, Sadashiv Nagar, Belgavi-590001 Pan:Aajcr6351B . . . . . . . Appellant

delay by filing condonation petition. On the other hand, there is no evidence to suggest that the assessee was vigilant in complying the provisions of section 12A(b)(ii) of the Act. Therefore, in the absence of sufficient reasons, there is much less scope for condonation and allowing the exemption

YAKSHIT YUVA FOUNDATION,BELAGAVI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BENGALURU

Appeals stands Allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 233 & 234/Pan/2025 Yakshit Yuva Foundation O/O Taekwondo Master Rao, 1St Fl, Gadekar Complex, P B Road, Kakati S.O., Belagavi. Pan : Aaaty9435D . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Exemption, Bangalore. . . . . . . . Respondent

condone the same, we deem it fit to vacate the first premise of delay in filing applications as founded in rejecting the impugned applications by the Ld. CIT(E). Ergo ordered accordingly. ITAT-Panaji Page 9 of 22 Yakshit Yuva Foundation Vs CIT(E) ITA Nos.233 & 234/PAN/2025 15. Now coming to merits of the case; we observed that, in rejecting

YAKSHIT YUVA FOUNDATION,BELAGAVI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BENGALORE

Appeals stands Allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 233 & 234/Pan/2025 Yakshit Yuva Foundation O/O Taekwondo Master Rao, 1St Fl, Gadekar Complex, P B Road, Kakati S.O., Belagavi. Pan : Aaaty9435D . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Exemption, Bangalore. . . . . . . . Respondent

condone the same, we deem it fit to vacate the first premise of delay in filing applications as founded in rejecting the impugned applications by the Ld. CIT(E). Ergo ordered accordingly. ITAT-Panaji Page 9 of 22 Yakshit Yuva Foundation Vs CIT(E) ITA Nos.233 & 234/PAN/2025 15. Now coming to merits of the case; we observed that, in rejecting

CENTRE FOR INCUBATION AND BUSINESS ACCELERATION,VERNA vs. CENTRALIZE PROCESSING CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.152/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2024-25 ) Centre For Incubation & Vs. I T O- Exemption, Business Acceleration, Ward-1, Angel Charities, Pundalik Niwas, Angel Ashram, Panaji-403001, Verna, Salcete, Goa. Goa-403722. Pan/Gir No. Aafcc5621B (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By Shri.Mahendra Gohel.Ar Revenue By Smt. Rijula Uniyal. Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm:

condoning the delay lies with the CBDT and therefore the assessee is not eligible for exemption u/sec11 of the Act and confirmed

CARE AND COMPASSION GOA,SARZORA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD - 1, PANAJI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.86/Pan/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17

condone the delay for online submission of the report. The ld. CIT(Exemption) rejected the assessee’s application on the ground

COFRE DO FUNDO DA CRUZ ALO DE BAMBOLIM,BAMBOLIM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, , DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.305/Pan/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16 ) Cofre Do Fundo Da Cruz Alo Vs National E – De Bombolim, Assessment Centre, . 101/1,Holy Cross Shrine, Delhi-110001 Bambolim, Gmc Complex, . Bambolim-403202, Goa. Pan .No. Aabtc0675N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Smt.Pratibha.R. Ar Revenue By Shri.Deshmukh S Prakashsr.Dr

condonation of delay u/sec 119(2)(b) of the Act in filling Form.No.10B with the Commissioner of Income Tax(exemptions

M/S. AHILIABAI SARDESSAI, ,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

condone the said delay. 5. The assessee raised four grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in restricting the addition made by the AO under Rule 8D(2)iii) of the Rules. 6. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that the assessee earned exempt

M/S. AHILIABAI SARDESSAI, ,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI

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

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

condone the said delay. 5. The assessee raised four grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in restricting the addition made by the AO under Rule 8D(2)iii) of the Rules. 6. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that the assessee earned exempt

M/S THE QUEPEM URBAN CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,QUEPEM vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1, MARGAO

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon.Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.(Through Web-Based Video Conferencing Platform) The Parshwanath Co-Op. Vs Pr.Cit, Hubballi. Credit Society Ltd., 535, 536, 1St Floor, Padmavati Chambers, Kulkarni Galli, Belgaum. Pan: Aaaat 4145 L Appellant Respondent Candolim Urban Co-Op. Credit Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Society Ltd., St.Joseph Panaji, Goa. Apartment, Near Football Ground, Candolim, Bardez. Pan: Aabac 2053 P Appellant Respondent

delay of 150 days is condoned and both the appeals were heard on merits. 5. That now the only issue remains for adjudication in all these appeals is with regard to claim of deduction u/sec. 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessees submitted that these matters are covered by the earlier decision

THE SHIRODA PROGRESSIVE URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,PHONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2(3), PANAJI

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon.Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.(Through Web-Based Video Conferencing Platform) The Parshwanath Co-Op. Vs Pr.Cit, Hubballi. Credit Society Ltd., 535, 536, 1St Floor, Padmavati Chambers, Kulkarni Galli, Belgaum. Pan: Aaaat 4145 L Appellant Respondent Candolim Urban Co-Op. Credit Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Society Ltd., St.Joseph Panaji, Goa. Apartment, Near Football Ground, Candolim, Bardez. Pan: Aabac 2053 P Appellant Respondent

delay of 150 days is condoned and both the appeals were heard on merits. 5. That now the only issue remains for adjudication in all these appeals is with regard to claim of deduction u/sec. 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessees submitted that these matters are covered by the earlier decision

THE CANDOLIM URBAN CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,CANDOLIM, GOA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(1), PANAJI

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon.Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.(Through Web-Based Video Conferencing Platform) The Parshwanath Co-Op. Vs Pr.Cit, Hubballi. Credit Society Ltd., 535, 536, 1St Floor, Padmavati Chambers, Kulkarni Galli, Belgaum. Pan: Aaaat 4145 L Appellant Respondent Candolim Urban Co-Op. Credit Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Society Ltd., St.Joseph Panaji, Goa. Apartment, Near Football Ground, Candolim, Bardez. Pan: Aabac 2053 P Appellant Respondent

delay of 150 days is condoned and both the appeals were heard on merits. 5. That now the only issue remains for adjudication in all these appeals is with regard to claim of deduction u/sec. 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessees submitted that these matters are covered by the earlier decision

THE PARSHWANATH CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,BELGAUM vs. PR. CIT, HUBBALI

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon.Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.(Through Web-Based Video Conferencing Platform) The Parshwanath Co-Op. Vs Pr.Cit, Hubballi. Credit Society Ltd., 535, 536, 1St Floor, Padmavati Chambers, Kulkarni Galli, Belgaum. Pan: Aaaat 4145 L Appellant Respondent Candolim Urban Co-Op. Credit Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Society Ltd., St.Joseph Panaji, Goa. Apartment, Near Football Ground, Candolim, Bardez. Pan: Aabac 2053 P Appellant Respondent

delay of 150 days is condoned and both the appeals were heard on merits. 5. That now the only issue remains for adjudication in all these appeals is with regard to claim of deduction u/sec. 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessees submitted that these matters are covered by the earlier decision

THE BARDEZ BAZAR CONSUMERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,MAPUSA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), PANAJI

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon.Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.(Through Web-Based Video Conferencing Platform) The Parshwanath Co-Op. Vs Pr.Cit, Hubballi. Credit Society Ltd., 535, 536, 1St Floor, Padmavati Chambers, Kulkarni Galli, Belgaum. Pan: Aaaat 4145 L Appellant Respondent Candolim Urban Co-Op. Credit Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Society Ltd., St.Joseph Panaji, Goa. Apartment, Near Football Ground, Candolim, Bardez. Pan: Aabac 2053 P Appellant Respondent

delay of 150 days is condoned and both the appeals were heard on merits. 5. That now the only issue remains for adjudication in all these appeals is with regard to claim of deduction u/sec. 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessees submitted that these matters are covered by the earlier decision

THE BARDEZ BAZAR CONSUMERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,MAPUSA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), PANAJI

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon.Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.(Through Web-Based Video Conferencing Platform) The Parshwanath Co-Op. Vs Pr.Cit, Hubballi. Credit Society Ltd., 535, 536, 1St Floor, Padmavati Chambers, Kulkarni Galli, Belgaum. Pan: Aaaat 4145 L Appellant Respondent Candolim Urban Co-Op. Credit Vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Society Ltd., St.Joseph Panaji, Goa. Apartment, Near Football Ground, Candolim, Bardez. Pan: Aabac 2053 P Appellant Respondent

delay of 150 days is condoned and both the appeals were heard on merits. 5. That now the only issue remains for adjudication in all these appeals is with regard to claim of deduction u/sec. 80P(2)(d) regarding interest income. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessees submitted that these matters are covered by the earlier decision

ASHAJYOTHI SC/ST MAHILA ABHIVRUDDHI KENDRA, BELAGAVI,BELAGAVI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

Appeals stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 162 & 290/Pan/2025

Exemption), Bangalore [‘CIT(E)’] both dt. 27/03/2025 passed u/s 12AB(4) & 80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] whereby the application for grant of regular 12AB & 80G registrations were rejected. ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 10 Ashajoyti SC/ST Mahila Abhivruddhi Kendra Vs CIT(E) ITA Nos.162 & 290/PAN/2025 2. Since facts involved in this twin appeals and issue

ASHAJYOTHI SC/ST MAHILA ABHIVRUDDHI KENDRA,BELGAUM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, BENGALURU

Appeals stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 162 & 290/Pan/2025

Exemption), Bangalore [‘CIT(E)’] both dt. 27/03/2025 passed u/s 12AB(4) & 80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] whereby the application for grant of regular 12AB & 80G registrations were rejected. ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 10 Ashajoyti SC/ST Mahila Abhivruddhi Kendra Vs CIT(E) ITA Nos.162 & 290/PAN/2025 2. Since facts involved in this twin appeals and issue

COFRE DO FUNDO DA CRUZ AL TO DE,BAMBOLIM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTION) WARD - 1, PANAJI

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2017-18 Cofre Do Fundo Da Cruz Alto De Bambolim 101/1, Holy Cross Shrine, Bambolim Gmc Complex, Bambolim, Goa-403202 Pan:Aabtc0675N . . . . . . . Appellant V/S The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward-1, Panaji. . . . . . . . Respondent

exemption claim u/s 11 and 12 of the Act to the assessee. There was sufficient cause which prevented the assessee from filing the required ITR and Form 10B within the prescribed time limit, therefore the assessee trust applied for condonation of delay