“corpus donation”

Charitable TrustsSection 11(1)(d)Section 11(1)(d)517 judgments

The decision most relied on for corpus donation is CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (211 ITR 293), cited in 204 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on corpus donation

CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal

211 ITR 293 · 1995 · High Court

204

citing judgments

A charitable trust can carry forward its excess expenditure from previous years and adjust it against the income of subsequent years, which qualifies as an application of income under Section 11. Additionally, voluntary contributions received for a specific purpose are treated as corpus funds and are not taxable.

CIT v. Programme for Community Organisation

248 ITR 1 · 2001 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The 15% exemption available to charitable trusts under Section 11(1)(a) is absolute and is not curtailed by the provisions of Section 11(2) regarding accumulation of income. Voluntary contributions received towards the corpus of a trust are excluded from the scope of income for Section 11(1)(a) exemption purposes.

CIT v. Programme for Community Organisation

228 ITR 620 · 1997 · High Court

citing judgments

For charitable or religious trusts, income for exemption under Sections 11 and 12 must be computed on a commercial basis, not head-wise as per Section 14, treating expenditure as a charge against income. The net income, along with non-corpus donations, forms the eligible base for determining the application of funds and the permissible accumulation under Section 11(1)(a).

P.M. Mohammed Meerakhan v. CIT

73 ITR 735 · 1969 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The assessee bears the onus to prove the genuineness and voluntary nature of donations received, including corpus donations. Failure to discharge this burden allows the Assessing Officer to treat such donations as non-genuine or accommodation entries.

CIT v. Bijli Cotton Mills (P) Ltd.

116 ITR 60 · 1979 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Dharmada collections are not taxable income of the assessee if they are genuinely meant for and spent on charitable purposes, or if they are voluntary contributions not accruing to the assessee's own benefit.

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation

278 ITR 152 · 2005 · High Court

citing judgments

For charitable trusts claiming Section 11 exemption, Section 68 concerning cash credits does not apply to donations received. The non-submission or non-production of donor details does not automatically lead to an inference that the trust is introducing unaccounted money.

CIT v. National Association of Software & Services Companies

345 ITR 362 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

A one-time fee paid by members, with the understanding that it can only be used for capital purposes, is considered a corpus donation and is not taxable as income. This is especially true when separate fees are collected for services rendered.

DIT v. Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram

357 ITR 731 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

Donations made for a specific purpose are considered capital in nature and cannot be applied for charitable or religious purposes, thus not being deemed income from property for the purposes of Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

Judgments citing corpus donation

Reliable Educational Alliance Society, New Delhi vs. CIT(E), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 834/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Reliable Educational Vs. Commissioner Of Income Alliance Society, Tax (Exemption), C/O- M/S. Rra Taxindia, Lucknow D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi Pan :Aaatr7920C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

assessee for the assessment year under dispute. On such examination of record, he noticed that in the year under consideration, the assessee had added corpus donation of Rs. 1 crore stated to have been received from M/s. Suran Protsahan. From the confirmation of accounts ... party on 02.04.2014 and had returned back the amount on 31.03.2015. Therefore, he was of the view that the assessee has not received any corpus donation of Rs.1 crore. Alleging that the Assessing Officer has not inquired into and examined the receipt of corpus donation of Rs. 1 crore, learned

Guru Gobind Singh Educational Society, Moga vs. Income Tax Officer Exemptions, Jalandhar

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

ITA 576/ASR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 148Section 250

Assessing Authority And All The Donors Had Also Admitted Before The Assessing Authority That They I.T.A. No.576/Asr/2018 3 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Made Corpus Donation Supported By The Affidavits Along With Relevant Evidence Of Donations Made By Them To The Society To The Assessing Authority During The Assessment Proceeding ... Opposed To Facts And Law And Circumstances Of Case. 5. Ld Cit (A)Completely Ignored The Facts, Supported With Decided Case Law That Corpus Donations Are Capital Receipts And Confirmation Of Addition Is Bad In Law. 6. That Ld Cit (A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Whereas On Certain Dates

ACIT, Circle (Exemption), Jodhpur vs. M/S. Vidya Bhawan Society, Udaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 325/JODH/2019[ 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Mar 2023

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Boradacit, Vs M/S. Vidya Bhawan Circle (Exemption), Society, Mohan Singh, Jodhpur Mehta Marg, Fatehpur, Udaipur (Raj.) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Assessee By Shri Amit Kothari, Ca Revenue By Shri S.M.Joshi, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/03/2023 Date Of 24/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Kul Bharat, J.M.: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Udaipur Dated 27.06.2019. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

basis. The expenditure would be a charge on the 13 | P a g e income, while the net income along with donations other than corpus donation, will form the eligible base out of which the Assessee is expected to apply 85%. This has also been explained in CBDT circular ... head-wise on statutory basis; the expenditure would be a charge on the income, while the net income along with donations other than corpus donation, will form the eligible base out of which the Assessee is expected to apply 85%. The Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai 'E' (Special Bench

Sadhana Foundation, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed and the addition of Rs

ITA 2129/DEL/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 131

circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of corpus donation of Rs. 2, 94,00,000/- received by the appellant from the donor companies / person by holding the same to be in the nature ... response to summon u/s 131 of Income Tax Act, 1961 who produced their identification papers, statement of accounts and other documents for confirming corpus donation having been given to the appellant Trust. The corpus donation of Rs.2,94,00,000/- is liable to be excluded from Total income

Mother Gian Educational Society, New Delhi vs. ITO(E) Ward - 1(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 8173/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Mother Gian Educational Vs Ito(E), Society, F-I/U, Vishakha Ward-1(4), Enclave, New Delhi-110034. New Delhi. Pan-Aabtm0218K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Tarun Rohtagi, Ca Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 20.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.03.2023

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 69C

case because the assessee had in fact disclosed the donations as its income and it could not be disputed that all receipts, other than corpus donations, would be income in the hands of the assessee. There was, therefore, full disclosure of income by the assessee and also application ... assessee trust then provisions of section 68 does not apply. Honourable High Court recognized that the situation may be different in case of corpus donation. As in the present case the amount of donation as held by the learned CIT - A is normal income already offered by the trust, these

ACIT, Exemption Circle, Patna vs. M/S Sharda Educational Society, Patna

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 281/PAT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna02 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 12ASection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

grounds: “1. For that the ld. CIT(A) has erred confirming addition of Rs.20,00,000/- out of Rs. 2.38 crore on account of corpus donation u/s. 68 of the Act. 2.For that the appellant has received the donation through proper banking channel and all the donors are Income ... society. (ii) The Ld. CIT(A)-1, Patna erred in law as well as in fact of the case in treating the sources of corpus donation of Rs. 1,70,00,000/ - as explained while the assessee society has denied to furnish sources of deposits in the foreign Bank account

M/S Sharda Educational Society, Patna vs. ITO(Exemption), Ward-1, Patna

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 270/PAT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna02 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 12ASection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

Gd Education Society, New Delhi vs. DCIT Exemption Circle, Ghaziabad

ITA 1488/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 234A

erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making aggregate addition Rs.1,10,00,000/- on account of corpus donation by treating it as revenue receipts instead of capital receipts as claimed and that too by recording incorrect facts and findings and without observing ... matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making aggregate addition Rs.1,10,00,000/- on account of corpus donation, is sustainable on various legal and factual grounds. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

Bhag Kaur and Harnam Singh Zoria, Dasuya vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Exemptions), Chandigarh

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

ITA 16/ASR/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar01 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12A

iiiae), have not been doubted. 2. That the ld.CIT(E), grossly erred to hold that the assessee was liable to pay tax on corpus donations in AY 2018- 19 & 2019-20, and till such payment of tax, application for registration could not be considered. 3. That ld.CIT(E) also erred ... shown an amount of Rs. 57,74,845/- as Corpus Fund in its Balance Sheet for F.Y. 2018-19 in the name of corpus donation. The Trust has diverted these receipts in the name of corpus to the Balance Sheet which, rather, should have been taken as income

Mesers Peer Panchal Educational and Welfare Trust, Jammu and Kashmir vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Chandigarh

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

ITA 598/ASR/2018[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 12A

shifting of present provision u/s 10(23C)(vi) to section a) 12A(a) of the Act is not permissible as per Law. That the corpus donation received from trustees is not for specific b) purpose. That the salaries and wages paid to the teaching staff ... have contributed fund towards corpus funds without any documentary evidences. Mere giving the list of persons can't confirm that it was a corpus donation. There is no evidence of any specific direction of the same being given as corpus donation. Without any specific direction & evidences for treating the fund

Al Mehmood Charitable Trust, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(5), Bharuch

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee (ITA No

ITA 93/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.92 & 93/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: (2016-17 & 2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Al Mehmood Charitable Trust, Income Tax Officer, By Pass Road Jambusar, Vs. Ward-1(5), Bharuch. Bharuch-392150 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaata 2702 M िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing 12/01/2023 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/01/2023

Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154

subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in treating Rs.49,65,411/- which is the corpus donations as the income of the trust. 3. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner

Al Mehmood Charitable Trust, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(5), Bharuch

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee (ITA No

ITA 92/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154

Kalinga Institute of Social Scinces(Kiss), Patia vs. CIT (Exemption)- Hyderabad, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 47/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack19 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.47/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Kalinga Institute Of Social Sciences Vs Cit(Exemption), Hyderabad At (Kiss), Bhubaneswar Plot No.582/1540, Kiit Campus-10 Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 Pan No. :Aaaak 7721 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla & S.K.Hota, Ars राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 19/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(E), Hyderabad At Bhubaneswar, Dated 14.03.2022, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2021-22/1040706357(1) For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. It Was Submitted By The Ld. Ar That The Assessee Is A Trust, Who Is Enjoying The Benefit Of Registration U/S.12A & 80G Of The Act. It Was Submitted That The Assessee Had Received Corpus Donations From M/S Kalinga Institute Of Industrial Technology (Kiit) In The Form Of Incurrence Of Capital Expenditure Of Rs.21,65,00,000/- & An Amount Of Rs.25,00,000/- From Container Corporation Of India (Cci). It Was Submitted That As Per The Mou Between The Assessee & Container Corporation Of India, The Container Corporation Of India Has Provided

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla & S.K.Hota, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 263

assessee is a trust, who is enjoying the benefit of registration u/s.12A & 80G of the Act. It was submitted that the assessee had received corpus donations from M/s Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology (KIIT) in the form of incurrence of capital expenditure of Rs.21,65,00,000/- and an amount ... submitted that as per the MOU between the assessee and Container Corporation of India, the Container Corporation of India has provided 2 Rs.25 lakhs corpus donation to the assessee for the purpose of setting up of tailoring unit for teaching tailoring to backward tribal girls in Orissa. The assessment

Shri Ram Education & Graminvikas Charitable Trust, Valsad vs. Income Tax Officer ( Exemption Ward), Surat

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 213/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainishri Ram Education & I.T.O., (Exemption Ward) Graminvikas Charitable Trust, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Jauagauri Park, Hathikhana, Majura Gate, Dharampur, Surat. Valsad-396050. Pan No. Aalts 324 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 10(23)(C)Section 11aSection 12ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 254(1)

Assessing Officer. From the balance sheet as on 31/3/2012, filed before the Charity Commissioner, it is evident that there is no increase in the corpus donation during the year, it is shown as a balance as per last balance sheet for Rs. 5.00 lacs. The Assessing Officer failed to consider ... been carried forward as opening balance as on 01/4/2012 in the audited books of account. The Assessing Officer wrongly considered increase in the corpus donation of Rs. 8,34,700/-. 8. On the addition of unexplained cash credit, the assessee submitted that the assessee has taken an unsecured loan from

Akshay Educational & Social Welfare Charitable Trust, Bodhgaya vs. DCIT, Circle-3, Gaya

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 3/PAT/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna11 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.03/Pat/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Akshay Educational & Social Welfare Charitable Trust............……….……Appellant Amawa (Thakar), Bodhgaya-824234. [Pan:Aacta5613R] Vs. Dcit, Circle-3, Gaya….....………............…............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A.K. Rastogi, Sr. Adv. & Shri Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 21, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 11, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.08.2016 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 11Section 12ASection 250

thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations delete the addition of Rs.2,30,00,000/- sustained by the CIT(A) in respect of the corpus donations received by the assessee trust from Bank of India". The above said order of the Hon'ble Tribunal is squarely applicable to the facts ... possible to hold that they are to be assessed as income of the assessees. We, therefore, hold that the assessment of the corpus donations cannot be supported.” The ld. Counsel, in this respect, has submitted that the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal has interpreted the provisions of section

M/S. Srinivas Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre, Mangalroe vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bengaluru

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

ITA 533/BANG/2022[N/A]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: N.A.

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. G. Manoj Kumar, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 269S

charge separately the monthly/quarterly tuition, term and computer fees. Another salient feature noticed from the evidences produced was that the contribution by way of 'corpus donation' ranges Rs.10000 - 15000 with no consequence of the medium of instruction and the standard in which the student

Vighnaharata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1284/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Vighnaharata Trust Cit (Exemption) 1605/06 Hurrah, City Of Joy, Room No-617, 6Th Floor, Near Railway Station, Lbs Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Vs. Marg, Mulund West, Mumbai- Parel, Mumbai- 400 012 400 080 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatv8040K Assessee By : Shri. Rajeev Khandelwal Revenue By : Shri. Achal Sharma Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.12.2022

For Appellant: Shri. Rajeev KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri. Achal Sharma CIT DR

Section 10Section 11Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 292B

following manner. (a) On perusal of the records it is seen that the AO has not made enquiry regarding cash donation and corpus donation. In this case assessee has not claimed exemption us/.s 11, then the Return filed by it in ITR-7 itself is an invalid Return, and therefore ... assessing officer on 14/12/2018. In the assessment order, the learned assessing officer noted that as assessee does not have eligibility certificate u/s 12 AA, corpus donation being building fund shown in the balance sheet received during the year amounting to ₹ 55,204,903/– is to be assessed as income

Parab Maratha Samaj, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1821/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1821/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Parab Maratha Samaj, Nfac, Delhi बिधम/ 10, 5Th Floor Mahohar Bldg, Priti Kanha, Chitable Path, Vs. Dadar(W), Mumbai-400 028 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaatp4197P (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Dinesh Shah, Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Neeta Jeph, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01.09.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 09.05.2022, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) For Ay 2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Neeta Jeph, Ld. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

Fund Rs 42,428 Total Rs 1,48,585 c) Total Income (a+b) Gross receipts as per IE A/c Rs 1,73,709 Corpus Donation Interest Rs 1,48,585 Total Gross income Rs 3,22,294 d) Expenses incurred by the Trust:- - Repairs & maintenance Rs 43,000 - Insurance ... direct the AO to allow the expenses and finally assessed the income as under:- Gross receipts as per IE A/c Rs. 1,73,709 Corpus Donation Interest Rs. 1,48,585 Total Gross income Rs. 3,22,294 Less: Office running expenses (Rs. 1,08,464) Less: Expenditure on objects

DCIT CC-5(2) Central Range-5, Mumbai vs. Jayanand Religious Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1727/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Jayananad Religious Trust Dcit Cc-5(2) Shop No. 1, 148, Rasik Kunj, Central Range-5, Room No. 1908, Air India Bldg, Jain Society, Sion (W), Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 022 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaatj8901F Assessee By : Sh. Sanjay Kapadia, Ar Revenue By : Sh. Nishant Somaiya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Kapadia, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Nishant Somaiya, DR

Section 115BSection 12Section 131Section 133ASection 143Section 147Section 148Section 68

fact disclosed the donations of Rs. 18,24,200 as its income and it cannot be disputed that all receipts, other than corpus donations, would be income in the hands of the assessee. There was, therefore, Jayanand Religious Trust; A.Y. 17-18 full disclosure of income by the assessee

Dy CIT -CC-7(1), Mumbai vs. Dr. D Y Patil Sports Academy, Mumbai

Accordingly, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1304/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Shri T. Sankar (Sr. AR)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 68

addition made by way of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on account of the corpus donation received by the assessee amounting to Rs.12,37,00,000/-. ITA Nos. 1295 & 1304/Mum/2021 A.Ys.2016-17 & 2015-16 D. Y. Patil Sports Academy ... revealed that the students and/or their parents who got admission in D.Y. Patil Medical College/University paid capitation fees in the guise of corpus donations to the assessee. In this regard, the AO referred to the statements of Shri Pratap Patil & Shri Tukaram Patil who were the employees of DY Patil