How many judgments cite Hiralal Bhagwati v. CIT?

71 judgments on BharatTax cite Hiralal Bhagwati v. CIT (246 ITR 188), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Hiralal Bhagwati v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 12A, Section 11, Section 143(3), Section 12, Section 12AA, Section 12AB.

Hiralal Bhagwati v. CIT

246 ITR 188High Court2000#1581 most cited

What is Hiralal Bhagwati v. CIT authority for?

Granting registration under Section 12A or Section 12AA for charitable trusts requires the Commissioner to genuinely examine the trust's objects and past activities; once such registration is granted, the Assessing Officer cannot subsequently deny tax benefits by re-examining the trust's objects.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Hiralal Bhagwati v. CIT · 246 ITR 188 · Section 12AA registration · Section 12A registration · charitable trust objects examination · past activities for registration · Section 2(15) general public utility · tax benefits after registration · Commissioner's duty 12AA · Assessing Officer denying benefits

Sections most often in play

Section 12A Section 11 Section 143(3)Section 12 Section 12AA Section 12AB Section 154 Section 2(15)

Issues it is cited on

section 12aa(1)(b)section 12aa(1)section 12aa(3)advancement of general public utility proviso to section 2(15)corpus fund cancellation of registration section 254(2)section 13(3)section 13(1)section 2(15)mistake apparent from record

Judgments citing Hiralal Bhagwati v. CIT

Icrw Group Gratuity Trust, New Delhi vs. CIT(E), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 761/DEL/2021[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jun 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2018-19 Assessment Year 2021-22 Icrw Group Gratuity Trust, Vs Cit (Exemptions), C-59, Ground Floor, Delhi. South Extension Part Ii, New Delhi 110 049 Pan: Aabti3510L Assessment Year: 2020-21 Iclei South Asia Group Gratuity Trust, Vs Cit (Exemptions), C-3, Lower Ground Floor, Delhi Green Park Extension, New Delhi – 110 016. Pan: Aabti7567H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anand Chaudhuri, Advocate Revenue By : Sh. Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari,Cit,Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.06.2023

For Appellant: Shri Anand Chaudhuri, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari,CIT,DR

Section 12ASection 25

…concluded that the assessee trust was not created for any general welfare of the employees. 7. Similarly, the ld.CIT(E) distinguished the order of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court relied upon by the assessee in the case of Hiralal Bhagwati vs. CIT, reported in 246 ITR 188 (Guj) as factually distinguishable. The ld.CIT(E) observed that in that case, the trust was created to ‘give financial aid to the employees of Gujarat Law Society in cases of death of an employee during his/her service, illness or permanent disability which incapacitates the employee to discharge his/her duties.’ In order to avail the benefits, t…

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyd vs. Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool, Visakhapatnam

Accordingly, the I.T.T.A. is dismissed

ITTA/14/2017HC Andhra Pradesh15 Sept 2022

Bench: C.PRAVEEN KUMAR,TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 260

…ate Tribunal was justified in holding that registration u/s 12-A was a fait accompli, to hold the Assessing Officer back from further probe into the objects of the Trust. Though, the Court 3 [2000] 246 ITR 188 ; [2000] 161 CTR 401 14 did not delve into the issue in detail, but observed in paragraph No.5, as under: “5. On a perusal of the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Hiralal Bhagwati (supra), we now find that Question No. “B” is also concluded by the said judgment [refer to 1st para of page 196]. Since the Revenue did not…

Sindhu Youth Association, Raipur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 29/RPR/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur28 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.29/Rpr/2019 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-2019) Sindhu Youth Association, Vs Cit(Exemption), Bhopal Sindhu Bhawan, Sector-4, Devendra Nagar, Raipur Pan No. : Aakts 3401 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Smt. Laxmi Sharma & Shri Vimal Agrawal, Cas राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29/07/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Cit(E), Bhopal, Dated 24.12.2018 For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. The Sole Ground Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Is Against The Action Of The Cit(E) In Rejecting The Application Of The Assessee Filed For Exemption U/S.80G Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Society Running Charitable Organization Registered U/S 12A Of The Income Tax Act, Which Was Granted Vide Order Dated 28.03.2008, Mainly Engaged In Charitable Activities For The Welfare Of Society Including Relief Of Poor, Blood Donation & Blood Infusion Camps For Thalassemia Patients & Medical Relief For The Poor, Etc. The Office Of The Society Is Situated At Devendra Nagar, Raipur (C.G.). The Assessee Society Had Filed An Application For Exemption U/S 80G Of The Act In Form No. 10G On 07/06/2018. However

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Smt. LaxmiFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(i)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…registration u/s 12AA of the Act at one end would result in the issuance of approval u/s 11 80G(5) at the other. Consistent judicial opinion in this regard, however, is otherwise. The issue is, as such, no longer res integra. 6. In "Hiralal Bhagwati vs. CIT", 246 ITR 188 (Guj.), while holding that once registration u/s 12AA of the Act was granted, the order rejecting the application u/s 80G(5) of the Act was liable to be quashed, the Hon'ble High Court observed that the registration of a charitable trust u/s 12A of the Act is not an idle or empty formality; that this is apparent from the provisions of Section 12A…

Audit Bureau of Circulations, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee vide ITA No

ITA 6393/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Nahta &For Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 11Section 13Section 13(8)Section 2(15)

…e to be allowed in the interest of justice. In support of the said contention, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has relied upon the cases titled as Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd. Vs. DIT (Ex.) (23 taxmann.com 319) (Mum ITAT), Hiralal Bhagwati Vs. CIT (246 ITR 188) (2000) (Bom. High Court), Bar 11 ITA No. 6393/Mum/2016 & ITA Nos.2040 to 2043/Mum/2019 AYs. 2009-10 to 2014-15 M/s Audit Bureau of Circulations Vs. ITO (Exemption)-1(1) Council of Maharashtra Vs. CIT (126 ITR 27) (1980) (Bom. H.C.), Shri Khot Hindu Steel Mandal Vs. CIT (209 ITR 396 (1993) (Bom High Court), Banglore Club Vs. CIT (29 taxmann.com…

M/S. Regional Centre for Development Cooperation (Rcdc), Bhubaneswar vs. CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 417/CTK/2018[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Before S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year: 2019-2020 2020 M/S. M/S. Regional Regional Centre Centre For For Vs. Cit (Exemptions), Cit (Exemptions), Development Cooperation, Hig Development Cooperation, Hig- Hyderabad 26, K-6, 6, Housing Housing Scheme, Scheme, Phase-Ii, Ii, Kalinga Kalinga Vihar, Vihar, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. No.Aaatr 2167 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty P.R.Mohanty, Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Goutam, Cit (Dr)

For Appellant: Shri P.R.MohantyFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Goutam

Section 11(1)(c)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80o

…2016-17 and also scrutiny assessments for other assessment years i.e 2011-12, 2012-13,. 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, we also observe that the Assessing Officer has not 7. We find that the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of In "Hiralal Bhagwati vs. CIT", 246 ITR 188 (Guj.) has held that that once registration u/s 12AA of the Act was granted, the order rejecting the application u/s 80G(5) of the Act was liable to be quashed. The Hon’ble High Court took into account the submissions that once registration u/s 12A of the Act is granted, a grant of benefits under the act cannot be denied; that the ITO was not jus…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4395/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…charitable purpose includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief and advancement of any other object of general public utility. The assessee's case falls within the phrase of the definition general public utility . In the decision reported in (2000) 246 ITR 188 in the case of Hiralal Bhagwati Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, the Gujarat High court considered the said phrase in the context of Section 12AA registration and held that registration of the charitable trust under Section 12AA of the Act is not an idle or empty formality; the Commissioner of Income-tax has to examine the objects of the trust as…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4394/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4393/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4392/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4391/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas

Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

Manav Adhikari Seva Samiti, Sambalpur vs. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad

In the result, Appeal of the assessee in ITANo

ITA 249/CTK/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.249/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2018-19) Manav Adhikari Seva Samiti Vs Cit, (Exemption ), Society Hyderabad Dhanupali, Sambalpur Odisha Pan No. : Aaaam2540E (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R. Mohanty, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K. Gautham, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 29/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed At The Instance Of Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Hyderabad (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 29.05.2019 For The Assessment Year 2018-19.The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. For That, The Order Of The Forum Below Is Arbitrary, Illegal, Unjustified & Erroneous & Has Been Passed On Improper Application Of Mind, Being Devoid Of Merit As Such Deserves To Be Quashed In Limine. 2. For That, The Denial Of Grant Of Approval U/S 80G On The Ground That, The Assessee Is Acting As A Contractor For Implementation Of The Work Entrusted By The Granting Agency Deserves To Be Allowed

For Appellant: Shri P.R. Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Gautham, CIT-

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

…his issue has been dealt by the Coordinate Bench Lucknow in the case of Samekit Mahila Evam Bal Vikas Sansthan (supra) under the similar facts and circumstances and relying on the judgments of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Hiralal Bhagwati vs. CIT 246 ITR 188(Guj.) has held as under: 7. Heard. In „Hiralal Bhagwati‟ (Supra), rightly relied on by the assessee, it has been held that once registration 12A of the Act stands granted, the application u/s 80G(5) cannot be rejected. The Agra Bench of the ITAT has followed this legal position vide order dated 08.03.2018, passed in „Dr. Gyanendra Goel Foundation…

ITO (E) -1(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Foundation, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6279/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hon'Ble Itat In Its Own Case In A.Y.2011-12 Which Is Pending For Adjudication."

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 13(3)Section 25

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM) I.T.A. No. 6279/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2012-13) ITO(E)-1(1) Aditya Birla Foundation Vs. Room No. 508 C-1, Aditya Birla Centre 5th Floor, Piramal S.K. Aahire Marg, Worli Chambers, Lalbaug Mumbai-400 030. Mumbai-400 012. PAN : AAATA0382P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ronak Doshi Department by Shri Rajeev Harit Date of Hearing 12.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement 28.10.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income…

Icrw Group Gratuity Trust, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), New Delhi

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

ITA 2244/DEL/2018[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2018-19

Section 12Section 12ASection 25Section 80G

…cular country or state and it is sufficient if the intention to benefit section of the public as distinguished from a specified individual is present. (iv) Also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Hiralal Bhagwati Vs CIT (2000) 246 ITR 188 (Guj) wherein the Hon’ble court held that trust formed for the benefit of employee shall also be entitled for benefit of 80G and 12A registration. 4. On the contrary, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT (exemption) and submitted that payment of gratuity is a statutory requirement of a company and creating a trust for discharging said st…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maharaji Education Trust, Ghaziabad

The appeal are dismissed

ITA 5138/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, C. AFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas[CIT]–

Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

…/s 12A is sufficient proof of it being established for charitable purpose." Similar view has been affirmed in the decisions of CIT Vs. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club 110 ITR 392 (Mad.), Madhya Pradesh Madhyan Vs. CIT 256 ITR 277 (MP) and Hiralal Bhagwati Vs. CIT ) 246 ITR 188, 193 (Guj.) approved by Apex Court in above decision and Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority, 2017 396 ITR 323 (Gujarat). The power of such cancellation is vested only with the Commissioner and not with the AO. The AO cannot determine that the objects of the institution are not charitable. However, till such time that the registration u/s 12A o…

Agra Development Authority, Agra vs. DCIT., Circle-1, Agra

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 216/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2021AY 2011-12

Section 124Section 142Section 153

…gistration u/s 12A. The provisions of section 2(15) cannot, legally, be invoked during the subsistence of registration u/s 12A. Ld. CIT(A) has arbitrarily differentiated the authoritative judicial pronouncement in the case of Hira Lal Bhagwati vs. CIT [(2000) 246 ITR 188 (Guj)] and ACIT VS Surat City Gymkhana (2008) 170 Taxmann 612 (SC). 3.Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both in law and on facts, in holding the activities of the appellant as commercial in utter disregard to the authoritative pronouncement of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Lucknow Development Authority [(2013) 38 taxmann.com 246 (All.)]…

Jhansi Development Authority, Jhansi vs. ACIT Circle-4, Agra

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 149/AGR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

…gistration u/s 12A. The provisions of section 2(15) cannot, legally, be invoked during the subsistence of registration u/s 12A. Ld. CIT(A) has arbitrarily differentiated the authoritative judicial pronouncement in the case of Hira Lal Bhagwati vs. CIT [(2000) 246 ITR 188 (Guj)] and ACIT VS Surat City Gymkhana (2008) 170 Taxmann 612 (SC). The order of Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and perverse. 3. Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both in law and on facts, in holding the activities of the appellant as commercial in utter disregard to the authoritative pronouncement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Lucknow Dev…

ACIT Circle-4, Agra vs. Jhansi Development Authority, Jhansi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 355/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

…gistration u/s 12A. The provisions of section 2(15) cannot, legally, be invoked during the subsistence of registration u/s 12A. Ld. CIT(A) has arbitrarily differentiated the authoritative judicial pronouncement in the case of Hira Lal Bhagwati vs. CIT [(2000) 246 ITR 188 (Guj)] and ACIT VS Surat City Gymkhana (2008) 170 Taxmann 612 (SC). The order of Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and perverse. 3. Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both in law and on facts, in holding the activities of the appellant as commercial in utter disregard to the authoritative pronouncement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Lucknow Dev…

Jhasi Development Authority, Jhansi vs. Dy. C.I.T., Circle-4, Agra

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

ITA 256/AGR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Section 12ASection 145(3)Section 2(15)

…gistration u/s 12A. The provisions of section 2(15) cannot, legally, be invoked during the subsistence of registration u/s 12A. Ld. CIT(A) has arbitrarily differentiated the authoritative judicial pronouncement in the case of Hira Lal Bhagwati vs. CIT [(2000) 246 ITR 188 (Guj)] and ACIT VS Surat City Gymkhana (2008) 170 Taxmann 612 (SC). The order of Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and perverse. 3. Because the Ld. CIT(A) erred, both in law and on facts, in holding the activities of the appellant as commercial in utter disregard to the authoritative pronouncement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Lucknow Dev…

Ratan Chan D Chhattibai Seva Samiti, Lucknow vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 570/LKW/2019[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 Dec 2020

Bench: Shri A.D Jain & Shri T.S. Kapoora.Y. N.A.

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

…ng of registration u/s 12AA of the Act at one end would result in the issuance of approval u/s 80G(5) at the other. Consistent judicial opinion in this regard, however, is otherwise. The issue is, as such, no longer res integra. In “Hiralal Bhagwati vs. CIT”, 246 ITR 188 (Guj.), while 6. holding that once registration u/s 12AA of the Act was granted, the order rejecting the application u/s 80G(5) of the Act was liable to be quashed, the Hon’ble High Court observed that the registration of a charitable trust u/s 12A of the Act is not an idle or empty formality; that this is apparent from the provisions of Section…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Vijayawada vs. Cargo Handling Private Workers Pool Trust, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 313/VIZ/2018[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Jun 2020AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Dr. C.P. Rama Swami, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.R.S. Narayan, CIT DR

Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)

…rd, it is pertinent to note the case law relied upon by Ld AR. In the case of ACIT Vs. Surat City Gymkhana (2008) (300 ITR 214), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has affirmed the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Hiralal Bhagwati vVs. CIT (2000) (246 ITR 188 (Guj) in holding that the registration of a Trust u/s 12A of the Income-tax Act of 1961 once done is a fait accompli and the Assessing Officer cannot thereafter probe into the objects of the Trust. For the sake of convenience, we extract below the head notes of the Surat City Gymkhana case cited supra: “The registration of a trust under section 1…