HOLYFAITH TRIBAL W AND D TRUST ,RANCHI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, RANCHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayshri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayshri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Holyfaith Tribal W & D Trust, Ranchi, Holyfaith Tribal W & D Trust, Ranchi, I.T.O., 406, Midland East Apartment, 406, Midland East Apartment, Exemption Ward, Exemption Ward, Vs. Anantpur, Chutia, Doranda, Anantpur, Chutia, Doranda, Ranchi. Ranchi-834002 (Jharkhand) 834002 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaath 5200 R Aaath 5200 R Appellant/ Assessee Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Respondent/ Revenue

Section 13(1) and 13(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and as such, the exemption claimed U/s 11 and 12 is 1961 (the Act) and as such, the exemption claimed U/s 11 and 12 is 1961 (the Act) and as such, the exemption claimed U/s 11 and 12 is disallowed. The notices U/s 133(6) were

GAJANAN FERRO PVT.LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

D E R PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. These appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna, [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] all dated 26/07/2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 to 2014-15 respectively. These appeals of the assessee are common facts

GAJANAN FERRO PVT.LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

D E R PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. These appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna, [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] all dated 26/07/2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 to 2014-15 respectively. These appeals of the assessee are common facts

GAJANAN FERRO PVT.LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

D E R PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. These appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna, [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] all dated 26/07/2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 to 2014-15 respectively. These appeals of the assessee are common facts

NITU SINGH,JAMSHEDPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

D E R PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. These appeals by the assessee(s) are directed against the separate orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna, [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] both dated 27/07/2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. Both these appeals of the assessees are common facts and grounds, therefore

RINKU SINGH,JAMSHEDPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

D E R PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. These appeals by the assessee(s) are directed against the separate orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna, [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] both dated 27/07/2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. Both these appeals of the assessees are common facts and grounds, therefore

M/S. JUNIOR CHAMBER INTERNATIONAL,,RANCHI vs. ITO , EXEMPTION WARD, RANCHI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes only

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

D E R PER: BENCH 1. This appeal by the appellant is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/ learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 24/11/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015- 16. In this appeal, the appellant has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. For that

HARDEEP SINGH,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO(TDS)J, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

D E R These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the common order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur, both dated 30.07.2018 for the assessment year 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. 2. At the outset, I find that as per the office note, there is a delay of 91 days in filing both the appeals under considerations

HARDEEP SINGH,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO(TDS)J, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

D E R These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the common order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur, both dated 30.07.2018 for the assessment year 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. 2. At the outset, I find that as per the office note, there is a delay of 91 days in filing both the appeals under considerations

M/S VIKAS SAMITIES,JAMSHEDPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, RANCHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

D E R Per Bench : These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the common order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur, both dated 30.07.2018 for the assessment years 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. 2. At the outset, we find that both appeals of the assessee are barred by limitation. Ld. AR has filed a petition in both

M/S VIKAS SAMITIES,JAMSHEDPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, RANCHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

D E R Per Bench : These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the common order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur, both dated 30.07.2018 for the assessment years 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. 2. At the outset, we find that both appeals of the assessee are barred by limitation. Ld. AR has filed a petition in both