SAURASTRA VIPASSANA RESEARCH CENTRE,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

1) of the Act denied the benefit of exemption under Section 11 & 12 of the Act. Saurastra Vipassana Research Centre vs. ITO Asst.Year –2020-21 4. In appeal before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that it was in the process of preferring an application for condonation of delay in filing Form 10B

LATE ARJAN KANJI PUJARA SMARK CHARITABLE TRUST BHACHAU,BHACHAU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

section 139 of the Act is condoned (ii) In all other cases of belated applications in filing Form No. 10B for years prior to AY. 2018-19, The commissioner of Income-tax are authorized to admit and dispose of by 31-3-2020 such applications for condonation of delay u's 119(2)(b) of the Act The Commissioner will

SHRI SWAMI VIVEKANAND TRUST,ADIPUR vs. THE DCIT (CPC) , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

condoned the delay in filing the appeal, however decided the appeal against the assessee on the ground that Form 10B was not filed along with the Return of Income. 4. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal: 1. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in confirming

SHRI SWAMI VIVEKANAND TRUST,ADIPUR vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.902/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Swami Vivekanand Trust The Ito (Exemption) बनाम Plot No.1, Dc-2 Ward-1 Rambaug Road Rajkot. Vs. Ward-6A, Adipur. Pan : Aabts 1102 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2025 Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Chennai[In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)/Nfac’], Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 02.05.2024, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Intimation Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Cpc) U/S 143(1) Of The Act, Dated 31.10.2015. Shri Swami Vivekanand Trust 2 2. Grievances Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Are As Under:

10B which is mandatory as per Section 12A(1)(b) of the Act, therefore, ld.CIT(A) cannot condone the delay

M/S. KUTCH MANDVI BHATIYA MAHAJAN,MANDV-KUTCH vs. THE ITO-WARD-1, RAJKOT

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

10B as per Page 14-16 of written submissions filed. Appellant can avail benefit of exemption u/s 11(2) of the Act if twin conditions are met with i.e. Filing of ITR and Filing of Form 10 before the due date u/s 139(1) of the Act. In the present case the Appellant has filed Form

SHRI SAJADIALI SARDAR PATEL SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD. ,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD-2(1)(2), RAJKOT., RAJKOT

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.607/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Sajadiali Sardar Patel Seva Ito Ward-2, (1) (2) Vs. Sahkari Mandali Ltd. Rajkot – 360001 At Sajadiyali – Rajkot New Aayakar Bhavan, At Sajadiyali Taluka, Race Course Ring Road, Jamkandorana, Dist, Rajkot – 360001 Sajadiyali – Rajkot 360001 Gujrat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaas2374L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav , Ld .Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28 / 01 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22 / 04/2025

1) denying benefit of section 11, since assessee had already filed audit report in Form 10B electronically during pendency of appellate proceedings along with copy of audited financial statements, delay in filing said form was to be condoned

KAKADIYA PARIVARNA KULDEVI SHREE BRAHMANI KHODIYAR TRUST,AMRELI vs. THE ITO EXEMPTION, WARD(2), RAJKOT., RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiassessment Year: (2021-2022) Kakadiya Parivarna Kuldevi Sghree The Ito Exemption Brahmani Khodiyar Trust Ward-2, Rajkot. Vs. Jaysukhbhai Laljibhai Kakadiya Jarkhida, Ta. Lathi, Amreli Pan : Aadtk 1328 E (Assessee) (Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.Dr

1) of the Act has been dismissed by the CIT(A) on 13-11-2023. The Audit report in Form 10B is filed before first appeal proceedings, which may be accepted as a compliance, when statutory audit was carried out earlier. Hence, Ld. Counsel prays the Bench that the matter may be set aside to the file of the Assessing

SORTHIYA AHIR GNATINO UTARO,BHAVNATH, JUNAGADH vs. THE ADIT (CPC), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

section 11(5) of the Act within the stipulated time. Therefore the CIT(Exemption) not satisfied with the reasons added by the assessee and rejected the condonation of delay in filing Form 10 for the Assessment Year 2019-20. Therefore the rejection of exemption made by the Assessing Officer does not require any interference and the assessee appeal is liable

SHRI SWAMINARAYAN MANDIR KUNDAL,KUNDAL, TALUKA: - BHARWALA, DISTRICT: -BOTAD vs. THE DCIT/ACIT(CPC),, BANGALORE

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

1) of the Act computing income of " 3,80,999/- by way of not granting deduction claimed under section 11 of the Act. The reason for the said adjustments mentioned in the said intimation was that the audit report in Form 10B was not e-filed along with the return of income. The assessee filed rectification application

SHRI OSHAM JAIN TEMPLE TRUST, RAJKOT,AT . PATANVAV, TALUKA DHORAJI, DIST. RAJKOT vs. THE CIT-(EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the matter is being set-aside to the file of the CIT(E) with the aforesaid directions

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 11(1)(d) of the Act. 5. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(E) holding that the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. At the outset, we observe that the present appeal is time barred by 513 days. Before us the Counsel

SHRI EKTA EDUCATION TRUST,KESHOD vs. THE ITO EXEMPTION, WARD (2), RAJKOT., RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 177/Rjt/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2022-23) Shri Ekta Education Trust बनाम Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Professional Academy Primary Ward-2, Rajkot, New Aayakar /Vs. School, Gokuldham Mangrole Road, Bhawan, Race Course Ring Keshod-362 220 Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafts 1570 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri D.M.Rindani, A.R. & Ms. Devina Patel, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)/Addl/Jcit(A)-1, (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”, Dated 12.02.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre/Assessing Officer U/S 143(1) Of The Act. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. The Learned Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Visakhapatanam, Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Cpc, Bangalore By Failing To Appreciate That The Actin Of Cpc, Bangalore In Making Adjustments To The Returned Income Of The Appellant By Way Of Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act & In Denying The Benefit Of Sec.11 Of The Appellant Was Not A Case Of Permissible Prima Facie Adjustment.

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)/Addl/JCIT(A)-1, (in short “Ld.CIT(A)”, dated 12.02.2025, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Centralized Processing Centre/Assessing Officer u/s 143(1) of the Act. 2. The grounds of appeal raised