← All Phrases

“anonymous donation”

Charitable TrustsSection 115BBCSection 115BBC175 judgments

The decision most relied on for anonymous donation is CIT v. Halai Namon Association ( (330 ITR 24), cited in 33 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on anonymous donation

CIT v. Halai Namon Association (
330 ITR 24 · 2011 · High Court
33
citing judgments

Profits generated from activities for the advancement of a general public utility (GPU) do not automatically qualify for exemption under Section 11 if the GPU is carried on as a business. Even if business profits are reinvested into charitable activities, the exemption under Section 11 will not be available.

CIT & Another v. MBA Nahata Charitable Trust
364 ITR 693 · Reported
14
citing judgments

Exemption under section 11 of the Income-tax Act is allowable for charitable trusts even if donations are anonymous, provided the amounts are spent towards charitable objects.

(a) DIT(E) v Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation (2005) 278 ITR 152 (Del) (b) CIT v. Uttaranchal Welfare Society
364 ITR 398 · 2014 · High Court
11
citing judgments

Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, does not apply to a sum that has already been offered as income or utilized for charitable purposes.

Judgments citing anonymous donation

M/S Aryans Educational and Charitable Trust, Mohali vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 821/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 821/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 M/S Aryans Educational & Vs. The Dcit, Circle-1 Charitable Trust, बनाम (Exemptions), # 2129, Phase-10, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L

For Appellant: Sh. Tej Mohan, Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 11(1)(d)Section 115BSection 13(1)(c)Section 133(6)Section 68

Educational and Charitable Trust, Mohali 5 They simultaneously run the risk of their act partaking the characteristics of perjury. The AO's finding about anonymous donations (that partake actually the character of bogus & uncorroborated donations) would have a serious implication on the charitable character of the assessee particularly in light ... addresses of students from whom the Society had received so called donations. The ld. Counsel also wanted to emphasize that such donations are not anonymous donations or contributions within the meaning of section 115BBC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ld. counsel also filed a copy of letter dated

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle ( Exemption ), Nagpur vs. M/S Shri Dadasaheb Gawai, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2/NAG/2018[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur11 Jul 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 115BSection 12A

case, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 12,63,03,550/- made u/s.115BBC of the I.T.Act, as anonymous donations, even though the AO brought on record defects in maintaining records as per the provision of said section. 2. Whether on the facts ... during the course of assessment proceedings. Resultantly, the income of the assessee was assessed treating the donation of Rs. 12,63,03,545/-as anonymous donation u/s 115BBC. 3. However, during the appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted detailed record of identity of donor indicating the name and address

Care Foundation Village, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward Exemption 1(3), Delhi

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

ITA 3746/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Nfac, Delhi.

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 57

Funds not invested in accordance with provisions of sec 11(5) {sec 13(1)(d)) Care Foundation Village vs. ITO (v) Anonymous donation (sec-115)} III. So, except in the conditions mentioned, the other Charitable Trust or institutions are subject to income tax at the rate applicable to individual assessee

M/S Tamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions, Wrd-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1098/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S. Thamizhvel P T Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, (Exemptions), Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1097/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S. Thamizhvel P T Rajan Commemoration Trust, Mylapore vs. ITO, (Exemptions) Ward 1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1096/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO(Exemptions) Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1095/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoratiuon Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1094/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions, Wrd-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1093/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S Tamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoratiuon Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions, Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1092/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S Tamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemmoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemptions, Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1091/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO(Exemptions) Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1090/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S Thamizhel Ptp Rajan, Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer(Exemptions), Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1089/CHNY/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO(Exemptions), Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1088/CHNY/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

M/S Thamizhvel Pt Rajan Commemoration Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, (Exemptions)Ward-1, Chennai

In the result, penalty appeals also stand allowed

ITA 1087/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1087/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1088/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1089/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1090/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1091/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1092/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1093/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1094/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1095/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) - Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 263

were brought to tax separately. 2.8 The Ld. AO also proceeded to tax the unexplained credit under the head corpus fund transfer treated as anonymous donation. The same stem from the fact that during the course of inspection proceedings at the assessee's premises in Chennai ... bear the heading "Corpus fund transfer", the explanation of the assessee was rejected and the differential of Rs.14.71 Lacs was brought to tax as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC. 2.9 The Ld. AO also noted the object clause 3(k) wherein one of the objects of trust was to ‘To build

Society for Training and Caring, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Guntur

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

ITA 63/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.63/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Society For Training & Caring Vs. Income Tax Officer E-1, Ganapathi Homes Exemption Ward 6Th Line, Pandaripuram Guntur Guntur [Pan : Aacas9356E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri,DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

assessee. The assessment was completed on 29.04.2021 and the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,03,82,240/- on account of anonymous donations u/s 115BBC of the Act and added back to the income of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred ... made by the 4 I.T.A. No.63/Viz/2024, A.Y.2018-19 Society for Training and Caring, Guntur assessing officer by erroneously treated Government Grants as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC(3) of the Act. 4. Any other grounds may be urged at the time of hearing. 6. At the outset, the only contention

Shri Merh Kshtriya Sabha, Ajmer vs. CIT(Appeals), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 632/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 May 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: None
Section 11(1)Section 115BSection 12ASection 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80G

following grounds:- 2 ITA No. 632/JPR/2023 Shri Merh Kshtriya Sabha “1. Considering the amount of donation of Rs. 31,69,001/- received as anonymous donation w/sec. 115BBC, without considering the facts & legal aspects. 2. Even after inclusion such donation amount of Rs. 31,69,001/- as “INCOME?” in return ... assessment proceedings. In view of above, income of the assessee amount of Rs. 31,69,001/- received by the Trust is treated as ‘Anonymous donation’ and he provisions of section 115BBC are being applied. Further, the amount of Rs. 1,78,966/- which has not been applied by the assessee

Shriteja Mandir Trust, Kota vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 37/JPR/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 May 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vedant Agarwal (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar (CIT)
Section 12A

applicant has not been found satisfactory. Hence, in the absence of such consistency, it seems that the trust/institution is in receipt of anonymous donation. Moreover, the applicant failed to furnish satisfactory response of the letters of this office seeking details of the students staying in the Hostels

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Vighnahartha Trust, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3530/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DRFor Respondent: None
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263

being voluntarily contribution received towards Vighnahartha Trust 3 ITA Nos. 3529 & 3530/Mum/2023 ITA No building fund for the year under reference as anonymous donations building fund for the year under reference as anonymous donations building fund for the year under reference as anonymous donations within the meaning of section 115BBC ... cannot be termed as contributions are received and as such, cannot be termed as contributions are received and as such, cannot be termed as 'anonymous donations' per the provisions of section 115BBC(3) of 'anonymous donations' per the provisions of section 115BBC(3) of 'anonymous donations' per the provisions

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Vighnahartha Trust, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3529/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DRFor Respondent: None
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263

being voluntarily contribution received towards Vighnahartha Trust 3 ITA Nos. 3529 & 3530/Mum/2023 ITA No building fund for the year under reference as anonymous donations building fund for the year under reference as anonymous donations building fund for the year under reference as anonymous donations within the meaning of section 115BBC ... cannot be termed as contributions are received and as such, cannot be termed as contributions are received and as such, cannot be termed as 'anonymous donations' per the provisions of section 115BBC(3) of 'anonymous donations' per the provisions of section 115BBC(3) of 'anonymous donations' per the provisions