THE JANSEVA TRUST,GODHRA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1)(2), VADODARA (NOW INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, GODHRA), GODHRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the above directions

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.851/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Janseva Trust The Ito बनाम/ Opp. Gyandeep School Ward-4(1)(1)(2), Vadodara V/S. Nr.Jivanlal Hospital (Now Ito, Ward-1, Godhra – 389 001 (Gujarat) Godhra – 389 001) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaatt 2888 D (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Nikhita Bhamblani & Amrin Pathan, Ars Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 29.08.2023, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. The Said Appeal Arises From The Assessment Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Ito), Ward 4(1)(2), Vadodara [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”], Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act)”], On 24.12.2019. The Janseva Trust Vs. Ito Asst. Year : 2017-18

charitable micro-finance activities. However, no reconciliation of these deposits with individual borrower accounts or adequate supporting evidence was provided at any stage of the proceedings. The AO invoked Section 69A of the Act to treat the deposits as unexplained income. While the assessee's explanation of loan recoveries was not properly verified by the AO, the onus

RADHA MOHAN EDUCATION CHARITABLE TRUST,VI.MOYAD, TAL.PRANTIJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), PALANPUR

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

Charitable Trust deposited cash of Rs.4,90,000/- in its bank account during the demonetisation period (9th November 2016 to 30th December 2016) in old currency. Since the assessee has not responded any of the Statutory Notices and not filed the return of income, the Assessing Officer proceeded on the basis of Section

LATE SMT. SAVITABEN PATEL EDUCATION CHARITABLE TRUST,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, ANAND

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Charitable Trust vs. ITO] - 2 – explanation of the assessee, the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee did not file its return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18. The case of the assessee was identified in Actionable Information Monitoring System (AIMS) for cash deposit of Rs.16

SHRI RUSHABHDEV SWETAMBAR MURTIPUJAK JAIN SANGH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2 (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar&Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

charitable trust under section 12AA of the Act. The Assessing Officer received information through NMS/Insight database indicating that cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 21,56,720/- and bank interest income of Rs. 1,37,082/- were recorded in certain bank accounts during the financial year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, corresponding to PAN AAATR2081G. According

ANAND EDUCATION TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD

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

69A of the Act, taxed under Section\n115BBE of the Act.\nFacts of the Case:\n2.\nThe assessee is a charitable trust

SHRI SHAMLAJI AAROGYA SEVA TRUST,GODHRA vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), SURAT AT -VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.138/Ahd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Shamlaji Aarogya Seva Trust The Pr.Cit (Central) बनाम/ Kanelav Road Surat At Vadodara Dhahod Road V/S. Godhra – 389 001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri H. Phani Raju, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29/08/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04 /09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld.Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Surat [Hereinafter Referred To As "Pcit"] Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18, Wherein The Pcit Held That The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”) Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 16.11.2019, Was Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interests Of

69A of the Act, thereby leading to revenue loss. The Ld.PCIT further concluded that ITA No.138/Ahd/2022. Shri Shamlaji Aarogya Seva Trust vs. The Pr.CIT(Central) Asst. Year : 2017-18 5 the AO did not disallow the claim for exemptions despite evidence that the trustees had misused the trust’s funds for personal gains. The Ld.PCIT further concluded that

GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY AHMEDABAD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

69A ITA Nos. 2612 to 2616/Ahd/2025 Gujarat Medical Education and Research Society Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Asst. Years –2015-16 & 2018-19 - 5– of the Act, time deposits of Rs.272,59,22,944/- as unexplained investments under section 69 of the Act, foreign remittance of Rs.45,59,238/- towards purchase of medical equipment as unexplained expenditure under section

GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY AHMEDABAD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

69A ITA Nos. 2612 to 2616/Ahd/2025 Gujarat Medical Education and Research Society Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Asst. Years –2015-16 & 2018-19 - 5– of the Act, time deposits of Rs.272,59,22,944/- as unexplained investments under section 69 of the Act, foreign remittance of Rs.45,59,238/- towards purchase of medical equipment as unexplained expenditure under section

GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY AHMEDABAD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

69A ITA Nos. 2612 to 2616/Ahd/2025 Gujarat Medical Education and Research Society Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Asst. Years –2015-16 & 2018-19 - 5– of the Act, time deposits of Rs.272,59,22,944/- as unexplained investments under section 69 of the Act, foreign remittance of Rs.45,59,238/- towards purchase of medical equipment as unexplained expenditure under section

GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY AHMEDABAD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

69A ITA Nos. 2612 to 2616/Ahd/2025 Gujarat Medical Education and Research Society Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Asst. Years –2015-16 & 2018-19 - 5– of the Act, time deposits of Rs.272,59,22,944/- as unexplained investments under section 69 of the Act, foreign remittance of Rs.45,59,238/- towards purchase of medical equipment as unexplained expenditure under section

GUJARAT MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH SOCIETY AHMEDABAD,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMP, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

69A ITA Nos. 2612 to 2616/Ahd/2025 Gujarat Medical Education and Research Society Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Asst. Years –2015-16 & 2018-19 - 5– of the Act, time deposits of Rs.272,59,22,944/- as unexplained investments under section 69 of the Act, foreign remittance of Rs.45,59,238/- towards purchase of medical equipment as unexplained expenditure under section

SHREE RADHA MADHAV GAU SEVA CHARITABLE TURST,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), BHAVNAGAR

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2017-18

Charitable Activity and is a Trust for maintaining Gaushala. As per the information, it was observed by the Revenue that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.15,32,000/-in its bank account during the demonetisation period i.e. from 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016. The commission under Section 131(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 25.03.2017 and the summons

LALITADEVI N. TIBREWALA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 318/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Lalitadevi N. Tibrewala, Pr. Commissioner Of 6, Professor Colony, Vs. Income Tax, Nr. Vijay Cross Roads, Ahmedabad-5 Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aappt0073M

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

THE FALAHE DARAIN EDUCATION SOCIETY,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, EXMP., AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ITA No. 2111/Ahd/2025 [The Falahe Darain Education Society vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2016-17 - 2 – referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-17. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition

SANDEEPKUMAR MITHULAL MEHTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(10), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for statistical purpose, the appeal of assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1002/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Sandeepkumar Mithulal Mehta, I.T.O., 7, Rajasthan Society, Vs. Ward-3(3)(10), Opp. Meghdoot Petrol Pump, Ahmedabad. Sahibaug, 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 798 held 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