SOMANI CHARITABLE TRUST,GWALIOR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, , GWALIOR

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed in above terms

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

income and expenditureaccount for utilization towards charitable objects thereon. Hence, we hold that in any case, the donationsreceived by the assessee society cannot be brought to tax in the assessment. We hold that since the only reason for denial of exemption u/s 11 was absence of registration u/s 12AA(which was granted to assessee society on 29.10.2010 with effect from

SOMANI CHARITABLE TRUST,GWALIOR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed in above terms

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

income and expenditureaccount for utilization towards charitable objects thereon. Hence, we hold that in any case, the donationsreceived by the assessee society cannot be brought to tax in the assessment. We hold that since the only reason for denial of exemption u/s 11 was absence of registration u/s 12AA(which was granted to assessee society on 29.10.2010 with effect from

SOMANI CHARITABLE TRUST,GWALIOR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed in above terms

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

income and expenditureaccount for utilization towards charitable objects thereon. Hence, we hold that in any case, the donationsreceived by the assessee society cannot be brought to tax in the assessment. We hold that since the only reason for denial of exemption u/s 11 was absence of registration u/s 12AA(which was granted to assessee society on 29.10.2010 with effect from

SOMANI CHARITABLE TRUST,GWALIOR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed in above terms

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

income and expenditureaccount for utilization towards charitable objects thereon. Hence, we hold that in any case, the donationsreceived by the assessee society cannot be brought to tax in the assessment. We hold that since the only reason for denial of exemption u/s 11 was absence of registration u/s 12AA(which was granted to assessee society on 29.10.2010 with effect from

SOMANI CHARITABLE TRUST,GWALIOR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR

The appeals of the assessee stand allowed in above terms

Bench: :Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

income and expenditureaccount for utilization towards charitable objects thereon. Hence, we hold that in any case, the donationsreceived by the assessee society cannot be brought to tax in the assessment. We hold that since the only reason for denial of exemption u/s 11 was absence of registration u/s 12AA(which was granted to assessee society on 29.10.2010 with effect from

ACIT-CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AGRA vs. PUNEET AGARWAL, AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Charitable Trust (2022) 450 ITR 368 (Mad) (HC ) iii) Bachittar Singh vs. CIT 2010 (AIR 328ITR400)(P&H HC) iv) Roshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC) Further, surrender is also based on incriminating material, which has been found and seized from a premise covered under search. Non deposit of post dated cheques does not tantamount to retraction

VISHWAMBHAR DAYAL AGARWAL,AGRA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Charitable Trust (2022) 450 ITR 368 (Mad) (HC ) iii) Bachittar Singh vs. CIT 2010 (AIR 328ITR400)(P&H HC) iv) Roshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC) Further, surrender is also based on incriminating material, which has been found and seized from a premise covered under search. Non deposit of post dated cheques does not tantamount to retraction

ACIT-CIRCEL-2(1)(1), AGRA vs. MAYANK AGRAWAL, AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

Charitable Trust (2022) 450 ITR 368 (Mad) (HC ) iii) Bachittar Singh vs. CIT 2010 (AIR 328ITR400)(P&H HC) iv) Roshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC) Further, surrender is also based on incriminating material, which has been found and seized from a premise covered under search. Non deposit of post dated cheques does not tantamount to retraction

INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF DIVINE LOVE JAGADGURU DHAM ,MATHURA vs. ITO,WARD (EXEMPTION), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshinternational Society Of Divine Vs. Ito, Love Jagadguru Dham Raman Ward (Exemption), Reti, Vrindavan, Mathura- Aayankar Bhawan, 281121 Sanjay Place, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aati2546M Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 03/02/2026

income for charitable purposes and completed the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Sections 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Act on 08-03-2021. The Assessee Trust challenged the assessment order before the learned NFAC. 5. The learned NFAC observed that the Assessee Trust had incurred expenditure of Rs. 24,10,611 on account of relief

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA vs. SH. VISHWAMBHAR DAYAL AGARWAL, AGRA

Charitable Trust (2022) 450 ITR 368\n(Mad) (HC)\nBachittar Singh vs. CIT 2010 (AIR 328ITR400)(P&H HC)\nRoshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC)\nFurther, surrender is also based on incriminating material, which has\nbeen found and seized from a premise covered under search. Non\ndeposit of post dated cheques does not tantamount to retraction

SHREE BADSHAH YADAV CHARITABLE TRUST,MAINPURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(5), MAINPURI

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 Shree Badshah Yadav Charitable Vs. Income Tax Officer, Trust Campus S. K. Scientific Ward -4(2)(5), Public Inter College Karhal, Mainpuri Manipuri Pan : Aaots3631B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anurag Sinha, Adv. Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18.02.2026 Order

addition of Rs. 37,00,000/- as unexplained money under section 69A read with section 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961, without appreciating that the Appellant is a charitable trust

CHANDRAPAL SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER SHIVPURI, GWALIOR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar

Charitable Trust vs. CIT, reported in (2024) 169 taxmann.com 543(Bombay),judgment and order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji & 4 | P a g e ITA No.113, 114 & 115/Agr/2024 Ors, reported in 1987 AIR 1353 and judgment and order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindalco

CHANDRAPAL SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFICER SHIVPURI, SHIVPURI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar

Charitable Trust vs. CIT, reported in (2024) 169 taxmann.com 543(Bombay),judgment and order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji & 4 | P a g e ITA No.113, 114 & 115/Agr/2024 Ors, reported in 1987 AIR 1353 and judgment and order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindalco

CHANDRAPAL SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER SHIVPURI, SHIPURI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar

Charitable Trust vs. CIT, reported in (2024) 169 taxmann.com 543(Bombay),judgment and order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag v. Mst. Katiji & 4 | P a g e ITA No.113, 114 & 115/Agr/2024 Ors, reported in 1987 AIR 1353 and judgment and order of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Hindalco

ITO EXMP, AGRA vs. HARDAYAL CHARITABLE & EDUCATIONAL TRUST, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the revenue appeals ITA No

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

addition of Rs. 2,30,00,000/- on the ground that the appellant trust continues to enjoy the ITO-Exemption CIT (Exemption), Agra v M/s. Hardayal Charitable and Educational Trust, Shikhobad registration and benefit of exemption u/s 12A and section 11 of the Act, by holding that the assessee was entitled for the exemption on income

HARDAYAL CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST, FIROZABAD vs. ITO (EXP) AGRA, AGRA

In the result, both the revenue appeals ITA No

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

addition of Rs. 2,30,00,000/- on the ground that the appellant trust continues to enjoy the ITO-Exemption CIT (Exemption), Agra v M/s. Hardayal Charitable and Educational Trust, Shikhobad registration and benefit of exemption u/s 12A and section 11 of the Act, by holding that the assessee was entitled for the exemption on income

GAYATRI SHIKSHA NYAS,AGRA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

addition under section 143(1) by treating voluntary contributions as income under section 11(1)(d), whereas the appellant never claimed exemption under section 11 but under section 10(23C)(iiiad). 8. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the settled law, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside

GAYATRI SHIKSHA NYAS,AGRA vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), AGRA, AGRA

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

addition under section 143(1) by treating voluntary contributions as income under section 11(1)(d), whereas the appellant never claimed exemption under section 11 but under section 10(23C)(iiiad). 8. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the settled law, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside