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

TDS thereon, whether the same contributes any change in the status of the trust being charitable in nature. 8.7 During

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

TDS thereon, whether the same contributes any change in the status of the trust being charitable in nature. 8.7 During

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

TDS thereon, whether the same contributes any change in the status of the trust being charitable in nature. 8.7 During

GUJARAT STATE PLASTIC MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DDIT(E),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

TDS was also deducted. The objects and activity of the assessee has to seen in the light of the provisions of Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act. Charitable objects defined in the section 2(15) of the Act are: * relief of the poor, * education, * medical relief, 4 . A.Y. 2010-11 *preservation of environment (including watersheds, forests and wildlife

ITO (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT STATE PLASTIC MANUFACTURER'S ASSOCIATION,, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

TDS was also deducted. The objects and activity of the assessee has to seen in the light of the provisions of Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act. Charitable objects defined in the section 2(15) of the Act are: * relief of the poor, * education, * medical relief, *preservation of environment (including watersheds, forests and wildlife) and preservation of monuments

MEHTA SAKARCHAND KALIDAS TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT CPC , BANGLORE

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2017-18

Charitable Trust Act. The return of income of the Trust was filed on 30.03.2018 declaring total income of Rs.84,600/-. In the said return, credit was claimed for the TDS

NA vs. ARJAB FOUNDATION DAISAR,PATANVS.THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS discrepancies; gross fees indicate compliant withholding if applicable). Rejection on unverified non- submission disregards Section 12AB(3) inquiry mandate. Reliance: Sainath Education Charitable Trust

ITO(E),VADODARA, RACE CIURSE VADODARA vs. TAKSHSHILA FOUNDATION(NGO), KARELIBAUGH, VADODARA

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member & Co No.8/Ahd/2024 (In Ita No.118/Ahd/2024 – By Assessee) Assessment Year : 2022-23 The Income Tax Officer (E) Takshshila Foundation (Ngo) (Ward) Vs B/15, Suhas Society Race Course Harni Road Vadodara 390 007 Karelibaug, Vadodara – 390 018 (Gujarat) Pan:Aaatt 5363 K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent & Cross Objector) Assessee By : Shri D.K. Parikh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Arises From The Order Of The Office Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/Jcit (A)–6, Chennai [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"] Dated 08-12-2023, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2022-23 Against The Intimation/Order Passed U/S. 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short) By Cpc, Bengaluru & The Assessee Is In Cross Objection Thereof.

charitable Trust claiming exemption under sections 11 & 12 of the Act and the same were accepted in the past. AY 2022- 23, the assessee filed its return of income declaring NIL income. 2.1. The return was processed by CPC, Bengaluru vide Intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act dated 31.03.2023, disallowed entire application (expenses) of Rs.1

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VYAKTI VIKAS KENDRA INDIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2016-17

TDS thereon, whether the same contributes any change in the status of the trust being charitable in nature. 8.7 During

GUJARAT SICKLE ANEMIA CONTROL SOCIETY,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

Charitable Trust vs. ITO(TDS)-1, Indore, ITA No. 909/Ind/2019 as follows: ITA Nos. 1072 to 1074/Ahd/2017 (Gujarat Sickle Anemia

GUJARAT SICKLE ANEMIA CONTROL SOCIETY,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

Charitable Trust vs. ITO(TDS)-1, Indore, ITA No. 909/Ind/2019 as follows: ITA Nos. 1072 to 1074/Ahd/2017 (Gujarat Sickle Anemia

GUJARAT SICKLE ANEMIA CONTROL SOCIETY,,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

Charitable Trust vs. ITO(TDS)-1, Indore, ITA No. 909/Ind/2019 as follows: ITA Nos. 1072 to 1074/Ahd/2017 (Gujarat Sickle Anemia

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. GROW MORE FOUNDATION,, SABARKANTHA

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

charitable institutions. The assessee trust had made Rs. 2,39,692/- to Chandansingh H Rajput who is a contractor for the construction work of the trust. Having not satisfied with the reply filed by the assessee, the assessing officer added these disallowances and determined the gross total income as Rs. 2,31,37,731/- and demanded tax thereon. 3. Aggrieved

SMT. PASHIBEN PRAJAPATI FAMILY TRUST (DISC),AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the manner as indicated above

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) Has In-Turn Arisen From The Intimation Dated 07.12.2022 Issued By Cpc, Bengaluru, U/S.154(Cpc/2122/U5/ 314311772) Of The Act.

TDS credit of Rs.68,042/- and penalty of Rs.5000/- and interest of Rs.1430/- was paid. But, in response to the ITR-5, the appellant was taxed at MMR without giving effect of deduction under Chapter-VIA. 4.5 It is the contention of the appellant that the appellant trust is eligible to pay tax as per the second proviso to section

CITY MANAGER ASSOCIATION, C/O. AMC., WEST ZONE OFFICER,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CPC, , BANGLORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2337/Ahd/2017 [Asstt.Year: 2015-16]

charitable objects of the trust in future years. However, during the year 2015-16 the assessee could not utilize that accumulated income and offered it for taxation at Rs.8,79,000/-. The assessee was of the view that on this unutilized income, it is entitled for further accumulation at the rate of 15%. In other words, the assessee

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

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

charitable trust involved in microfinance lending, which transferred its Micro Finance Division (MFD) to the assessee and Indian Foundation for Inclusive Growth (IFIG) - A trust that is the holding entity of Ananya Finance and was funded by FWWB. The assessee entered into a Business Transfer Agreement (BTA) with FWWB on April 26, 2010, to acquire its Micro Finance Division

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

charitable trust involved in microfinance lending, which transferred its Micro Finance Division (MFD) to the assessee and Indian Foundation for Inclusive Growth (IFIG) - A trust that is the holding entity of Ananya Finance and was funded by FWWB. The assessee entered into a Business Transfer Agreement (BTA) with FWWB on April 26, 2010, to acquire its Micro Finance Division

ANANYA FINANCE FOR INCLUSIVE GROWTH PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

charitable trust involved in microfinance lending, which transferred its Micro Finance Division (MFD) to the assessee and Indian Foundation for Inclusive Growth (IFIG) - A trust that is the holding entity of Ananya Finance and was funded by FWWB. The assessee entered into a Business Transfer Agreement (BTA) with FWWB on April 26, 2010, to acquire its Micro Finance Division