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

28,105/- without appreciating the fact that once the proviso to section 2(15) is applicable the benefit of section 11 and 12 cannot be allowed further. 7. The Revenue carves over leave to add, alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete and / or rescind all or any Grounds of Appeal on or before the final hearing, in necessity so arises

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

28,105/- without appreciating the fact that once the proviso to section 2(15) is applicable the benefit of section 11 and 12 cannot be allowed further. 7. The Revenue carves over leave to add, alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete and / or rescind all or any Grounds of Appeal on or before the final hearing, in necessity so arises

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

28,105/- without appreciating the fact that once the proviso to section 2(15) is applicable the benefit of section 11 and 12 cannot be allowed further. 7. The Revenue carves over leave to add, alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete and / or rescind all or any Grounds of Appeal on or before the final hearing, in necessity so arises

JAYSHREE GOPALLALJI HAVELI CHARITABLE TRUST-UJALVAV,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.220/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : Na Jayshree Gopallalji Haveli The Cit (Exemption) बनाम/ Charitable Trust-Ujalvav Ahmedabad – 380 015 V/S. At Ujalvav, Umrala Bhavnagar – 364 290 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaetj 3303 P (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mohit Balani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr

Charitable Trust-Ujalvav vs. CIT(E) approval under section 80G(5) afresh on merits in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 28

PARUL AROGYA SEVA MANDAL TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

28 misappropriation of funds by the trust, providing a strong basis for the extrapolation of income. • ACIT vs. Surat City Gymkhana [2008] 170 Taxman 612 (SC): The Supreme Court held that registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act is a fait accompli, meaning once granted, the AO cannot question the objects of the trust unless the registration

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. PARUL AROGYA SEVA MANDAL TRUST, AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

28 misappropriation of funds by the trust, providing a strong basis for the extrapolation of income. • ACIT vs. Surat City Gymkhana [2008] 170 Taxman 612 (SC): The Supreme Court held that registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act is a fait accompli, meaning once granted, the AO cannot question the objects of the trust unless the registration

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD vs. PARUL AROGYA SEVA MANDAL TRUST, , AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

28 misappropriation of funds by the trust, providing a strong basis for the extrapolation of income. • ACIT vs. Surat City Gymkhana [2008] 170 Taxman 612 (SC): The Supreme Court held that registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act is a fait accompli, meaning once granted, the AO cannot question the objects of the trust unless the registration

PARUL AROGYA SEVA MANDAL TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

28 misappropriation of funds by the trust, providing a strong basis for the extrapolation of income. • ACIT vs. Surat City Gymkhana [2008] 170 Taxman 612 (SC): The Supreme Court held that registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act is a fait accompli, meaning once granted, the AO cannot question the objects of the trust unless the registration

PARUL UNIVERSITY,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT,EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member

28 misappropriation of funds by the trust, providing a strong basis for the extrapolation of income. • ACIT vs. Surat City Gymkhana [2008] 170 Taxman 612 (SC): The Supreme Court held that registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act is a fait accompli, meaning once granted, the AO cannot question the objects of the trust unless the registration

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.

Trust from the property held for charitable or religious purposes and it also provides for application and accumulation of income. On the other hand, section 28

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.

Trust from the property held for charitable or religious purposes and it also provides for application and accumulation of income. On the other hand, section 28

SHRI RAJESH RAVINDRAN CHARITY TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

Section 80G(5) of the Act reads as under: “(iii) the institution or fund is not expressed to be for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste;” The said sub-clause states that a fund institution established for charitable purposes should not be expressed to be for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste

SANDEEP MOHANRAJ SINGHI,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE4(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2018-19

charitable or religious institution, if any part of such income or any property of the trust or the institution is, during the previous year, used or ITA Nos.1205 & 769/Ahd/2025 Assessment Years: 2018-19 ACIT(E) vs. Dr. KR Shroff Foundation Page 22 of 24 applied directly or indirectly for the benefit of any person referred to in sub- section

GIVE FOUNDATION,BANGALORE vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the primary matter involved in all the Assessment

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 2(15) of the Act. Therefore, the activity of the assessee cannot be regarded as of charitable purpose. of advancement of general public utility during the Assessment Year 2009-10. Therefore the above decision is not applicable on facts of the case. 27. The second decision relied upon by the assessee is of Hon'ble Guiarat High Court

SHREE SANAND JAMALIYA PATIDAR PANCH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

28-02-2022 and registered with Deputy Charity Commissioner, Ahmedabad vide Certificate of Registration dated 31-05-2022. The objects of the Trust are as follows: The objectives of The main objectives of the organization are as follows. The the organizations necessary changes, amendments in the same can be done as per the requirement and, the same shall be performed

THE DY. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. UTTHAN SEWA TRUST,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

Trust from the property held for charitable or religious purposes and it also provides for application and accumulation of income. On the other hand, section 28

VISMRUTI SOCIAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee / applicant trust is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

Section 80G of the Act has not\ndealt with any of the submissions / contentions of the assessee / applicant\ntrust submitted during the course of hearing, which in our view is against\nthe principles of natural justice.\n10.\nIn the case of Shree Sahajanand Gaushala Trust VS.\nCommissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) [2024] 161 taxmann.com 591\n(Rajkot - Trib.)[28

SHRI VAISHNAV SADHU (BAVA VAIRAGI) GNATI TRUST MAHUVA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

28-08-2023 as follows: “Our Trust is registered under Gujarat public trust act on 02/02/1995 we have agreed with you our object of the trust deed as for the cast Shri Vaishnav Sadhu (Bava Vairagi) Gyati. But To Our Activities is Purely Religious for all Gyati As You see in our Audited Balance-Sheet For Such Situation Of Trust

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-6(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. ARMEE INFOTECH,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ITA No.1778/Ahd/2016 (by Revenue) is dismissed, and ITA No

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1778/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Acit,Cir.6(1), Vs. Armee Infotech Ahmedabad. 1002, Akik Building Opp: Rajpath Club, Sg Highway, Ahmedabad 380 0054. Pan : Aaifa 4964 D

section 80GGC of the Act. The grievance of the assessee in its appeal for the Asstt.Year 2014-15 is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.5,86,32,892/- which was claimed as deduction under Chapter VIA in respect of donation given to political party and charitable institutions. 28. Brief facts of the case