DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

108 shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. 5. In addition to the above, it has also been decided by the CBDT that where there is delay of upto 365 days in filing Form No. 10B for Assessment Year 2018-19 or for any subsequent Assessment Years

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

108 shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. 5. In addition to the above, it has also been decided by the CBDT that where there is delay of upto 365 days in filing Form No. 10B for Assessment Year 2018-19 or for any subsequent Assessment Years

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

108 shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. 5. In addition to the above, it has also been decided by the CBDT that where there is delay of upto 365 days in filing Form No. 10B for Assessment Year 2018-19 or for any subsequent Assessment Years

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

108 shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. 5. In addition to the above, it has also been decided by the CBDT that where there is delay of upto 365 days in filing Form No. 10B for Assessment Year 2018-19 or for any subsequent Assessment Years

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

108 shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. 5. In addition to the above, it has also been decided by the CBDT that where there is delay of upto 365 days in filing Form No. 10B for Assessment Year 2018-19 or for any subsequent Assessment Years

GURU KRIPA SEVA ASHYRAM,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, WARD 1(2), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15

108, satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. Perusal of the above CBDT's Circulars reveal that there is no blanket condonation of delay in filing tax audit in Form No. 10B for claim of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act. In fact, certain procedures/conditions have

SHRI MARTAND DEOSANSTHAN JEJURI,PUNE vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

108 could not be filed along with the return of income for AY 2016-17 and AY 2017-18. It has been requested that the delay in filing of Form no. 10B may be condoned. Previously, vide instruction in F. No. 267/182/77-IT(part) dated 09.02.1978, the CBDT had authorised the ITO to accept a belated audit report after recording reasons

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 8, PUNE vs. ASWANI DEVELOPERS, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr.Dipak P.Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.576/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Aswani Developers, Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune Vs Second Floor, S.P. Heights, Mumbai-Pune Road, Kasarwadi, Pune 411 034 Pan : Aarfa0761H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue आयकरअपीलसं. / It(Ss)A Nos.02 & 03/Pun/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Aswani Developers, Income Tax, Vs Second Floor, S.P. Heights, Central Circle-2(2), Pune Mumbai-Pune Road, Kasarwadi, Pune 411 034 Pan : Aarfa0761H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue

108 flats and obtained completion certificate for the same. 2. As per the Valuation Officer's report, the assessee has complied with the conditions provided in section 80IB(10) and AO ignored the same and failed to comment on the eligibility of section 80IB(10) of the Act. 3. 4. AO failed to appreciate the judgment of jurisdictional High Court

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.764/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Indian Medical Association V Dcit, Pune Branch, S Exemption Circle, Pune. 992, Dr.Nitu Mandke, Ima House, Tilak Road, Pune – 411002. Pan: Aaati2653M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil S. Pathak Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 16/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 28.02.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 22.05.2021 For A.Y.2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

condoned the Delay. However, here onwards we are discussing the merits of the case. 8. In this case, Assessee is a Charitable Trust duly registered u/s.12A of the Act. Copy of the said order has been filed by the Assessee. The Assessing Officer in an order u/s.143(3) rejected assessee’s claim for exemption u/s.11 of the Act. The relevant

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD,, SOLAPUR

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & G.D. Padmahshali

108/- in former and Rs.1,26,31,912/- and Rs.24,90,584/- in latter assessment year; respectively. 8. Mr. Gujarathi invited our attention to the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion, more particularly in A.Y. 2013-14 in para Nos. 6.6 page 40 onwards, that the assessee had very well proved to have utilized its own interest bearing surplus funds

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (OSD), CIRCLE -1,, SOLAPUR vs. M/S. LOKMANGAL AGRO INDUSTRIAL LTD,, SOLAPUR

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & G.D. Padmahshali

108/- in former and Rs.1,26,31,912/- and Rs.24,90,584/- in latter assessment year; respectively. 8. Mr. Gujarathi invited our attention to the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion, more particularly in A.Y. 2013-14 in para Nos. 6.6 page 40 onwards, that the assessee had very well proved to have utilized its own interest bearing surplus funds

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD, KOLHAPUR , KOLHAPUR vs. THE NEW MIRAJ EDUCATION SOCIETY, MIRAJ, DIST. SANGLI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

108 was without any malafide intentions to jeopardize the interest of the revenue by delaying the filing of Form 10B. Also, this is merely a procedural default that does not invalidate the eligibility of the exemption u/s 11 of the Act to the assessee trust. Subsequently, the assessee trust was given to understand that all the compliances were made

ARSA GLEE FOUNDATION,NASHIK, MAHARASHTRA vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), NASHIK, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

108 days respectively in filing of these appeals, for which, the assessee has filed condonation applications along with affidavits explaining the 2 ITA.No.1734 & 1721/PUN./2024 reasons for such delay which is due to ill-health of the trustee Mr. Arun Sawant who was looking after the day-to-day affairs of the trust. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referring

ARSA GLEE FOUNDATION,NASHIK, MAHARASHTRA vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), NASHIK

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

108 days respectively in filing of these appeals, for which, the assessee has filed condonation applications along with affidavits explaining the 2 ITA.No.1734 & 1721/PUN./2024 reasons for such delay which is due to ill-health of the trustee Mr. Arun Sawant who was looking after the day-to-day affairs of the trust. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referring