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

80G of the Act by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vide orders both dated 31.12.2024. 2. Brief facts of the case in ITA No.112/Agr/2025: The application for registration of the trust u/s 12AB of the Act was filed on 12.06.2024 by the assessee in Form No.10AB under Rule 17A of the Income Tax Rules

DHRITI FOUNDATION TRUST,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD, 1(3)(1), MATHURA, MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

trust is engaged in a very noble cause, providing free education to students belonging to economically weaker sections of society. These charitable activities are entirely funded through voluntary donations. Therefore, in the absence of timely grant of registration under Section 12AA and approval under Section 80G

DHIRITI FOUNDATION TRUST,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD, 1(3)(1), MATHURA, MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

trust is engaged in a very noble cause, providing free education to students belonging to economically weaker sections of society. These charitable activities are entirely funded through voluntary donations. Therefore, in the absence of timely grant of registration under Section 12AA and approval under Section 80G

M/S SHRI HARI SADHNA SANSKAR SANRAKSHAN,GWALIOR vs. CIT EXMP., BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

80G of the Act and that the trust has been granted the registration u/s 12AA of the Act. In support, the ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of ‘CIT 10. vs. Puja Shri Jalrambapa and Matushri Virbaima Charitable Trust’, (Guj) (Supra) and the ITAT, Agra Bench in the case of Bhagwati Samagra Uthan Trust vs. CIT (Copy filed

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

SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHA PRASAR EVAM SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITI ,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXTEMPTION) , BHOPAL

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

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

Charitable Trust (supra) dealt with only the issue/terminology of "whichever is earlier" which is applicable to new trust which have created recently, and it does not deal with condonation of delay CIT (Exemption) Bhopal in case of old trust who made the application before learned CIT(Exemption) very late, that is, the issue mention in cl. (iii) of 3rd proviso

SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHA PRASAR EVAM SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITI,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

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

Charitable Trust (supra) dealt with only the issue/terminology of "whichever is earlier" which is applicable to new trust which have created recently, and it does not deal with condonation of delay CIT (Exemption) Bhopal in case of old trust who made the application before learned CIT(Exemption) very late, that is, the issue mention in cl. (iii) of 3rd proviso

LIONS CLUB GUNA CITY PARMARTHIK NIYAS,GUNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), GWALIOR

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

80G. Appellant assessee claimed the exemption u/s 11 of the Act at the time of filing return. The CPC, Bengaluru considered Rs. 1,92,66,092/- as income of the appellant and raised demand of Rs.89,74,690/-, whereas according to the assessee, it had carried out charitable activities and had applied more than 85% of its receipts for charitable

STATE BANK OF INDIA,VRINDAVAN vs. CIT APPEALS 1, AGRA

In the result, ITA No. 65/Agra/2017 is allowed, whereas ITA

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

charitable organization having section 12AA and section 80G registration and hence not liable to pay tax, and so it should not be treated as an assessee in default. Many I.T.A Nos. 65& 66/Agra/2017 6 judicial precedents have been cited by the appellant in support of each of the above arguments. It is important to note that the appellant's default

SHRI ACHLESHWAR MAHADEVJI JI SARVJANIK NIYAS,GWALIOR vs. CIT(E), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year : 2025-26 Shri Achleshwar Mahadev Ji V Cit (Exemption) Sarvajanik Nyas, Sanatan Bhopal Dharm Mandir Road Gwalior- 474 001 Pan : Aahts1225J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Charitable Trust (supra) dealt with only the issue/terminology of "whichever is earlier" which is applicable to new trust which have created recently, and it does not deal with condonation of delay 8 Shri Achleshwar Mahadev Ji Sarvajanik Nyas v CIT (Exemption)Bhopal in case of old trust who made the application before learned CIT(Exemption) very late, that

BHARTIYA SADBHAWNA MANCH,JHANSI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 266/Agr/2025 and 267/Agr/2025 are allowed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

section 80G(5) of the Act were rejected. ITA No.266 & 267/Agr/2025 2. At the very outset, it has been brought to the notice of the Bench that both these appeals were filed on 08.05.2025 against the impugned orders dated 29.11.2024 and 30.12.2024 by a delay of about 94 days and 66 days respectively. Assessee has submitted through the delay condonation

BHARTIYA SADBHAWNA MANCH,JHANSI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 266/Agr/2025 and 267/Agr/2025 are allowed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

section 80G(5) of the Act were rejected. ITA No.266 & 267/Agr/2025 2. At the very outset, it has been brought to the notice of the Bench that both these appeals were filed on 08.05.2025 against the impugned orders dated 29.11.2024 and 30.12.2024 by a delay of about 94 days and 66 days respectively. Assessee has submitted through the delay condonation

INDIAN WOMEN IMPACT, JAIPUR ,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

80G of the Act by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vide respective orders dated 28.11.2024 and 30.12.2024. 2. Brief facts of the case in ITA No.34/Agr/2025: The application for registration of the trust u/s 12AB of the Act was filed on 02.05.2024 by the assessee in Form No.10AB under Rule 17A of the Income Tax Rules

INDIAN WOMEN IMPACT, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

80G of the Act by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vide respective orders dated 28.11.2024 and 30.12.2024. 2. Brief facts of the case in ITA No.34/Agr/2025: The application for registration of the trust u/s 12AB of the Act was filed on 02.05.2024 by the assessee in Form No.10AB under Rule 17A of the Income Tax Rules

OMKAR MEMORIAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,GWALIOR vs. CIT[EXEMPTION], BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Omkar Memorial Vs. Cit(E), Charitable Society, Bhopal Room No. 201, Ii Floor, Reac, Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaa08054B Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 05/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/02/2025

trust deriving profit in excess of 15%, then the Income Tax Act itself permits for accumulation in terms of section 11(2) of the Act to be utilized in future. Hence, in our considered opinion, surplus earning is not a sinful activity and in any manner does not hinder the concept of charity or charitable activities. Accordingly, the observations made