DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

Trust is also registered under Section 35AC of the Act by and under the notification dated 23.10.2007. 4. On 22.09.2011 the assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 with the DDIT(E)- Circle – 17(2), Bangalore declaring total income as Nil which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 25.07.2012 resulting into a refund

THE ACIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

Trust is also registered under Section 35AC of the Act by and under the notification dated 23.10.2007. 4. On 22.09.2011 the assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 with the DDIT(E)- Circle – 17(2), Bangalore declaring total income as Nil which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 25.07.2012 resulting into a refund

DCIT (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, BANGLORE vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA,, AHMEDABAD

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

Trust is also registered under Section 35AC of the Act by and under the notification dated 23.10.2007. 4. On 22.09.2011 the assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 with the DDIT(E)- Circle – 17(2), Bangalore declaring total income as Nil which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 25.07.2012 resulting into a refund

THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR vs. GUJARAT ENERGY RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE (GERMI),, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh& Ms. Madhumita Roy

charitable trust. However, Mr. Soparkar, for the Revenue, submitted that the assessee-trust itself could not have earned exemption under section 11(1) if it had blocked its income and had not spent it for the purposes for which it was created. In that connection, he invited our attention to section 11(1)(a) itself and submitted that the maximum

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

Trust's (Supra) the Supreme Court, while dealing with the provisions of Section 11 road with Section 2(15) of the Act, which defines "charitable purpose" observed as under; "The sense in which the word 'education' has been used in Section 2(15) of the Act in the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young is preparation

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

Trust's (Supra) the Supreme Court, while dealing with the provisions of Section 11 road with Section 2(15) of the Act, which defines "charitable purpose" observed as under; "The sense in which the word 'education' has been used in Section 2(15) of the Act in the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young is preparation

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

Trust's (Supra) the Supreme Court, while dealing with the provisions of Section 11 road with Section 2(15) of the Act, which defines "charitable purpose" observed as under; "The sense in which the word 'education' has been used in Section 2(15) of the Act in the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young is preparation

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

Trust's (Supra) the Supreme Court, while dealing with the provisions of Section 11 road with Section 2(15) of the Act, which defines "charitable purpose" observed as under; "The sense in which the word 'education' has been used in Section 2(15) of the Act in the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young is preparation

THE DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. UNITED WAY OF BARODA,, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

Trust's (Supra) the Supreme Court, while dealing with the provisions of Section 11 road with Section 2(15) of the Act, which defines "charitable purpose" observed as under; "The sense in which the word 'education' has been used in Section 2(15) of the Act in the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young is preparation

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S.UNITED WAYOF BARODA, VADODARA

In the result, ITA No. 3565/Ahd/16 is dismissed

Trust's (Supra) the Supreme Court, while dealing with the provisions of Section 11 road with Section 2(15) of the Act, which defines "charitable purpose" observed as under; "The sense in which the word 'education' has been used in Section 2(15) of the Act in the systematic instruction, schooling or training given to the young is preparation

M/S. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh&Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2589/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15) M/S. Gujarat Cricket Dcit, बनाम/ Exemptions, Circle-1, Association Vs. Ahmedabad Iind Floor, Akshar Arcade, Opp. Memnagar Fire Station, Nr. Vijay Char Rasta, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaa Ag1 205 C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

charitable purpose, the contribution from BCCI is not income under Income Tax Act. III. Set off of Brought Forward Deficit: The past losses and unabsorbed depreciation is available for set off. Your Honour is requested to give the set off the same.” 6. The AO has not accepted the submission of the assessee. The AO was of the view that

GUJARAT HOUSING BOARD (GHB),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE D.C.I.T. (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Him) Of Denying Exemption To The Appellant’S Income U/S.11 & 12 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Claimed In The Appellant’S Return, On The Ground That The Appellant’S Case Attracted The First Proviso To Section 2(15) & In Turn, Sub-Section(8) Of Section 13 Of The Act.

charitable purpose' in Section 2(15). As we held earlier, trade, commerce and business in Section 2(15) must be such as to involve an element of profit. Profit, however, is not the predominant motive of such trusts. In our view considering the nature of the Act, selling of plots and premises by the trust is only incidental and ancillary

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION),CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. NANDESARI INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION,, NANDESARI

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

charitable purpose as defined in section 2(15) of the Act, and therefore, the assessee is not entitled for benefit under section 11 of the Act. The ld.CIT(A) has considered both the issues in detail and observed that the activities of the assessee trust clearly falls within the ambit of the clause of preservation of environment and the assessee

BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

charitable activities" and thereby disallowing exemption u/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of the AO, in considering the activities carried out by the appellant are in nature of trade, commerce and business and therefore covered by the proviso to section 2

ITO(EXEMPTIONS),, AHMEDABAD vs. CHAMUNDA FOUNDATION,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the CO No.83/Ahd/2015 filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl.

charitable purpose u/s 2(15) of the Act. 3) As per the judgment Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana high court in case of Mahasabha Gurukul Vidyapeeth reported in 326 ITR 25 where in it was held that Once the all requisite requirement of section 11 to avail the benefit of the exemption fulfilled by the trust, the trust entitled

CHAMUNDA FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the CO No.83/Ahd/2015 filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Roysl.

charitable purpose u/s 2(15) of the Act. 3) As per the judgment Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana high court in case of Mahasabha Gurukul Vidyapeeth reported in 326 ITR 25 where in it was held that Once the all requisite requirement of section 11 to avail the benefit of the exemption fulfilled by the trust, the trust entitled

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. JAMNAGAR AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JAMNAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Roy

17 - activities, in the nature of trade, commerce or business or the activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business, the dominant and the prime objective has to be seen. If the dominant and prime objective of the WP(C) 1872/13 Page 54 of 55 institution, which claims to have been established for charitable purposes

SHRI MAHESH P. GANDHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-10,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1022 To 1025/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: (1992-1993 To 1995-1996) Shri Mahesh P. Gandhi, A.C.I.T., D-404, 5Th Floor, Vs. Circle-10, Dharnidhar Tower, Ahmedabad. Paldi, Ahmedabad.

Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that: “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under: "In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate

JT.CIT(EXEMPTION)CIRCL-2 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

trust is not eligible to claim exemption u/s. 11(2) of the Act r.w.r. 17(2) and 17(3) of the I.T. Rules for accumulation for specific purposes amounting to Rs.174,00,00,000/- [however, only Rs.28,27,97,868/- remains to be set apart u/s 11(2) of the Act after reducing revenue expenditure of Rs.3