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

Charitable Trust-vs-Fifth ITO reported in (1990) 34 ITD 489 (Bom) where similar issue was discussed taking into considering that particular circular being No.387 containing explanatory notes on the Finance Act, 1994, more particularly paragraph 28.6 as already reproduced hereinabove. Finally, the Hon’ble Tribunal, Bombay Bench was pleased to hold that the breach of section

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

Charitable Trust-vs-Fifth ITO reported in (1990) 34 ITD 489 (Bom) where similar issue was discussed taking into considering that particular circular being No.387 containing explanatory notes on the Finance Act, 1994, more particularly paragraph 28.6 as already reproduced hereinabove. Finally, the Hon’ble Tribunal, Bombay Bench was pleased to hold that the breach of section

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

Charitable Trust-vs-Fifth ITO reported in (1990) 34 ITD 489 (Bom) where similar issue was discussed taking into considering that particular circular being No.387 containing explanatory notes on the Finance Act, 1994, more particularly paragraph 28.6 as already reproduced hereinabove. Finally, the Hon’ble Tribunal, Bombay Bench was pleased to hold that the breach of section

SHRI SOUDHARMA BRIHAD TAPOGACHCHIYA TRISTUTIK JAIN SANGHA SAMARPANAM,AHMEDABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is devoid of\nmerits and the same is hereby dismissed

45 taxmann.com 273 (Allahabad) and held that:\n\" ... 7. In a recent judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Dawoodi\nBohara Jamat [2014] 43. taxmann.com 243, it has been held that Sections\n11 and 12 are substantive provisions which provide for exemptions to\nreligious or charitable trusts

ANJUMAN E NUSRATUL MUSLIMIN TANKARIA,BHARUCH vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

45. From the phraseology in clause (b) of section 13(1), it could be inferred that the Legislature intended to include only the trusts established for charitable

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

Charitable Public Trust [2015] 56 taxmann.com 182. 5.9 As discussed above, the denial of exemption section 11 & 12 by the AO is based on the incriminating documents found during the course of survey. In this regard the appellant reiterated that they have offered sum of Rs. 18.90 crore in PMGKY and taken the benefit of the scheme which covers more

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

Charitable Public Trust [2015] 56 taxmann.com 182. 5.9 As discussed above, the denial of exemption section 11 & 12 by the AO is based on the incriminating documents found during the course of survey. In this regard the appellant reiterated that they have offered sum of Rs. 18.90 crore in PMGKY and taken the benefit of the scheme which covers more

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

Charitable Public Trust [2015] 56 taxmann.com 182. 5.9 As discussed above, the denial of exemption section 11 & 12 by the AO is based on the incriminating documents found during the course of survey. In this regard the appellant reiterated that they have offered sum of Rs. 18.90 crore in PMGKY and taken the benefit of the scheme which covers more

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

Appeals are allowed

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

Charitable Public Trust [2015] 56 taxmann.com 182. 5.9 As discussed above, the denial of exemption section 11 & 12 by the AO is based on the incriminating documents found during the course of survey. In this regard the appellant reiterated that they have offered sum of Rs. 18.90 crore in PMGKY and taken the benefit of the scheme which covers more

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

Charitable Public Trust [2015] 56 taxmann.com 182. 5.9 As discussed above, the denial of exemption section 11 & 12 by the AO is based on the incriminating documents found during the course of survey. In this regard the appellant reiterated that they have offered sum of Rs. 18.90 crore in PMGKY and taken the benefit of the scheme which covers more

THE JT. CIT(EXEMPTION)(OSD), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD vs. DIVYA JYOTI TRUST, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Waseem Ahmed & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2015-16 Jt.Cit (Exemptions)(Osd) Divya Jyoti Trust Cir.2, Ahmedabad. Vs Tejas Eye Hospital Suthar Faliyaat & Post – Mandvi Surat 394 610. Pan : Aabtd 3401 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Jagirdar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Urjit Shah, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against Order Dated 7.6.2019 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-9/10321/Dcit(E), Cir.2-/17-18Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad [For Short “Ld.Cit(A)] Relating To The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

charitable trusts, capital gains are also considered as a part of income under section 11(1) and are not computed under the head 'Capital Gain' under section 45

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)

section 13(1)(b) of the Act is applicable even to a composite trust/ institution having both religious and charitable objects, by observing as follows: "… 45

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)

section 11(1)(a), the application of income and /or accumulation of such income for the purposes of the objects of the trust, is relevant. Thus, the concept of "total income", as contemplated u/s. 2(45) of the Act, is not relevant in the present context. 2. The concept of "Total Income", is not applicable in case of charitable

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)

45. From the phraseology in clause (b) of section 13(1), it could be inferred that the Legislature intended to include only the trusts established for charitable

BRAHMAKSHATRIYA KANJI DAMJI HINDU SARVAJANIK DHARAMSHALA PALITANA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

45. From the phraseology in clause (b) of section 13(1), it could be inferred that the Legislature intended to include only the trusts established for charitable

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

DWARIKA GREENS FOUNDATION,RAJKOT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is devoid of merits and the same is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

section 13(1)(b) of the Act is applicable even to a composite trust/ institution having both religious and charitable objects, by observing as follows: "… 45

SHRI MAHAVIR GOPALAN CHARITABLE TRUST,KAPADVANJ vs. THE ITO(EXEMPTIONS) BHAVNAGAR PRESENTLY THE ITO (EXEMPTION), VADODARA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

trust has been\ngranted registration u/s.12AA of the Act. During the impugned\nyear, the assessee was unable to apply its income to the tune of\nRs.14,45,863/- for its charitable activities and accordingly\nexercised the option provided in Section

DCIT CIRCLE -1 (EXEMPTION) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. NARODA ENVIRO PROJCT LIMITED , AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

45. The first and the foremost thing we want to clarify is that the registration of the assessee as a Charitable Institution and the license granted to the assessee as a company under Section 25 of the Companies Act would, prima facie, clothe the assesseee with the character of a charitable institution. However, neither of the above two events