JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JHANSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA

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

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)

trusts carrying out the activity of advancement of any other object of general public utility. Hence, the restriction put by section 11(4A) was still applicable to the other limbs in the definition of charitable purposes u/s 2(15) of the Act. 38. …………………… 39. The CBDT issued a circular dated 19.12.2008, paragraph-3 whereof reads as under:— "3

AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AGRA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

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

3). Moreover, it may be mentioned that the benefit of Section 11 is not absolute or conclusive. It is subject to control of Sections 60 to 63. If it is found by keeping in view the provisions of Sections 60 to 63 that it is not so includible then such income does not qualify for any relief." Para

OM DARSHAN TURST ,BAREILLY vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

trust were not for charitable purposes and 50 per cent of donations was from trustees themselves - Tribunal noted that no action under sub-section (3

FIROZABAD SHIKOHABAD,FIROZABAD vs. C.I.T.-II, AGRA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: This Bench, Alongwith The Annexures Mentioned Therein. The Contents Thereof Are As Follows:

Trust or Institution created wholly for charitable or religious purpose. We have to examine whether assessee authority can be said to be an “Institution” created wholly for charitable purpose. ITA 55/Agra/2015 9 The term “Charitable purpose” is defined in Section 2(15) of 12. Act, 1961 and before Finance Act, 2008 whereby it was substituted with effect from

R.S. PUBLIC SCHOOL,AGRA vs. CIT EXMP., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S Shri R.S. Public School, Vs. Cit(Exemptions) Bainpur Road, Sikandra, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Agra, (U.P.) Nagar, Lucknow Pan Aagts 6694 C

charitable purpose, one of the dominant factor to decide the grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act. 3. The CIT(E) further stated that the applicant has failed to provide any details of the persons to whom salary is being paidin clear violation of Section 13(1)(c) read with sub-section (3) of the Income

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

trust was not registered as a charitable society u/s. 12AA of the Act. Several grounds of appeals were raised before us, but the ld. Counsel stated that he wishes to make arguments with respect to ground Nos. 6, 7 & 8, which were identically worded in all these appeals and read as under : “6. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' was granted registration under

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

trust was not registered as a charitable society u/s. 12AA of the Act. Several grounds of appeals were raised before us, but the ld. Counsel stated that he wishes to make arguments with respect to ground Nos. 6, 7 & 8, which were identically worded in all these appeals and read as under : “6. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' was granted registration under

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

trust was not registered as a charitable society u/s. 12AA of the Act. Several grounds of appeals were raised before us, but the ld. Counsel stated that he wishes to make arguments with respect to ground Nos. 6, 7 & 8, which were identically worded in all these appeals and read as under : “6. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' was granted registration under

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

trust was not registered as a charitable society u/s. 12AA of the Act. Several grounds of appeals were raised before us, but the ld. Counsel stated that he wishes to make arguments with respect to ground Nos. 6, 7 & 8, which were identically worded in all these appeals and read as under : “6. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' was granted registration under

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

trust was not registered as a charitable society u/s. 12AA of the Act. Several grounds of appeals were raised before us, but the ld. Counsel stated that he wishes to make arguments with respect to ground Nos. 6, 7 & 8, which were identically worded in all these appeals and read as under : “6. BECAUSE, the 'appellant' was granted registration under

KRISHNA BALRAM FOUNDATION,MATHURA vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

trust's objectives and its intended charitable activities, in line with established legal precedents. 3. As your Honour mentioned during the previous hearing: - Relevant Extract of "Section

SAMARPAN ANNAM DANAM CHARITABLE SOCIETY,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable in nature and whether the activities which the Trust proposed to carry on are genuine in the sense that they are in line with the objects of the Trust. In contrast, the position would be different where the Commissioner proposes to cancel the registration of a Trust under sub-section (3

DCIT EXMP.CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. BIRLA JAN SEWA TRUST, GWALIOR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2012-13

section 13(3) of the Act and especially when the trust was being run on the commercial lines by sharing of receipts with prohibited persons on lump sum or percentage basis?” 2. The assessee is a charitable

AASTITVA JAIN FAMILY TRUST,ASHOKNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER CPC BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2015-16

Charitable and Religious Trust and also not Registered u/s12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act but a Private Family Trust which is not liable for filing its Income Tax Return u/s139(4A) of the Income Tax Act. Moreover we are reproducing analysis of Sec 164(1) provided for Taxation of Private Discretionary Trusts: (a) When trust income includes

BADARIPRASAD,GUNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER GUNA, GUNA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshbadriprasad, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Heerabagh Colony, Guna, Guna, Gwalior Gwalior (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Arapr6314B

Charitable Trust v. The ITO, Exemptions Ward, Trichy. - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai - ITA Nos.2416 & 2417/CHNY/2024 13 24.04.2025 Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax High Court of Telangana - 174 taxmann.com 1203 Badriprasad 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC

SUNITA,SAHU vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT,INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshashok Sahu, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Purana Bazar, Chirgaon, Ward-2(3)(1), Jhansi Jhansi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Jgsps3446H Sunita, Vs. Assessment Unit, Ward No. 2, Chobyana Income Tax Talrehat Lake View Department, Camp, Lalitpur, Lalitpur, National Faceless Up Appeal Centre, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Jgps3438H

Charitable Trust v. The ITO, Exemptions Ward, Trichy. - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai - ITA Nos.2416 & 2417/CHNY/2024 13 24.04.2025 Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax High Court of Telangana - 174 taxmann.com 1203 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC

ASHOK SAHU,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(1), JHANSI, JHANSI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshashok Sahu, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Purana Bazar, Chirgaon, Ward-2(3)(1), Jhansi Jhansi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Jgsps3446H Sunita, Vs. Assessment Unit, Ward No. 2, Chobyana Income Tax Talrehat Lake View Department, Camp, Lalitpur, Lalitpur, National Faceless Up Appeal Centre, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Jgps3438H

Charitable Trust v. The ITO, Exemptions Ward, Trichy. - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai - ITA Nos.2416 & 2417/CHNY/2024 13 24.04.2025 Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax High Court of Telangana - 174 taxmann.com 1203 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC

NARAYANI RATHORE,SHIVPURI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT,INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshnarayani Rathore, Vs. Assessment Unit, Peeroth Shivpuri, Income Tax Shivpuri, Mp Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Dhgpr1886H

Charitable Trust v. The ITO, Exemptions Ward, Trichy. - Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai - ITA Nos.2416 & 2417/CHNY/2024 13 24.04.2025 Tecumseh Products India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax High Court of Telangana - 174 taxmann.com 1203 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the action of the JAO issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act and submitted that both the NFAC