DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Charitable Trust and the same is leased to Baba Shri Chand Educational Society and the society is paying lease rent after deducting TDS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Charitable Trust and the same is leased to Baba Shri Chand Educational Society and the society is paying lease rent after deducting TDS

SHRI BHAVNOOR SINGH BEDI,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Charitable Trust and the same is leased to Baba Shri Chand Educational Society and the society is paying lease rent after deducting TDS

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI JATINDER SINGH BEDI, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue, ITA No 90/Asr/2020 is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Charitable Trust and the same is leased to Baba Shri Chand Educational Society and the society is paying lease rent after deducting TDS

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI AMAR SINGH EDUCATIONAL CHARITABE TRUST, JALANDHAR

In the result, the grounds of revenue 1

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Charitable Trust 1-C Chotti Baradari, Central Circle-1, Garha Road, Jalandhar Jalandhar [PAN: AAETS8075R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri. Gunjeet Singh Syal, Advocate Respondent by Smt. Rajinder Kaur, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 06/06/2023 Date of Pronouncement : 21/06/2023 2 I.T.A. No. 47 /Asr/2021 and Co 5/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The present

M/S SANT SHRI MAHESH MUNI JI BOREWALE EDUCATIONAL WELFARE ,MOGA vs. COMM. OF INCOME TAX ( EXAMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year - 2016-17

trusts, general Public for running/development of school(s) or college(s) h) The society shall have power to receive, hold and possess any property including securities or any kind and to construct and maintain any building, to manage, transfer or otherwise dispose of or deal in any property of school or society and to enter into contract

M/S MANAGING COMMITTEE SWAMI PREMANAND MAHAVIDALYA,HOSHIARPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION),, CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

trust/ society is not an idle formality [Anand MargaPracharakaSaughaVs CIT (1996) 218 ITR 254 (Cal)] 5. In order to appraise the activities and whether the same' were in sync with the stated objects an opportunity of personal hearing was accorded on, 09.05.2017 and the applicant was requested to file, the following details/ clarifications: i. Details of property vested

SHREE RADHA KRISHAN CHARITABLE SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

Charitable Vs. CIT (Exemptions), Society Near State Bank of Chandigarh. Patiala, G.T. Road Goraya, Jalandhar. (Respondent) [PAN: AAWAS1100L] (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Bharat Bhushan Garg, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 09.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.04.2025 ORDER Per: Udayan Das Gupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order

GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY ,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS) , SRINAGAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Charitable Trust v. Dy CIT [Writ Petition No. 618 of 2015, dated 12-12-2017]. However, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Rajesh Kourani (supra) which is revenue favouring held that section 234E of the Act was a charging provision creating a charge for the levy of fees for default

GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Charitable Trust v. Dy CIT [Writ Petition No. 618 of 2015, dated 12-12-2017]. However, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Rajesh Kourani (supra) which is revenue favouring held that section 234E of the Act was a charging provision creating a charge for the levy of fees for default

GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY ,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Charitable Trust v. Dy CIT [Writ Petition No. 618 of 2015, dated 12-12-2017]. However, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Rajesh Kourani (supra) which is revenue favouring held that section 234E of the Act was a charging provision creating a charge for the levy of fees for default

M/S. IQBAL MEMORIAL TRUST ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

charitable society registration u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act where the ld. AO has levied late fee of Rs.12,595/- for filing of TDS return late in respect of financial year 2012-13 under consideration. The counsel explained that the AO has stated in his order passed u/s 154 that is not empowered to determine the similarity of facts

MESERS EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD,PATHANKOT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

TDS) [2011] 335 ITR 287 (Pat), relied by the Revenue, directory. Further, that where the consequence/s of the breach of the time limit is not provided, the same is directory, is part of well-settled law, as explained by the Hon’ble Orissa High Court in Bhakta Vedanta Swami Charitable Trust

M/S EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD. ,PATHANKOT vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-6,, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

TDS) [2011] 335 ITR 287 (Pat), relied by the Revenue, directory. Further, that where the consequence/s of the breach of the time limit is not provided, the same is directory, is part of well-settled law, as explained by the Hon’ble Orissa High Court in Bhakta Vedanta Swami Charitable Trust

ARYA SAMAJ TRUST ,KAPURTHALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CPC, BANGALORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Ravish Sood

TDS of Rs. 29,567/-) was raised in the hands of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). However, the CIT(A) not finding favour with the contention advanced by the assessee that its entire receipts without considering the outgoings had wrongly been brought to tax by the CPC while summarily processing

GURU NANAK DEV HEALTH & EDUCATION SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD, JALANDHAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

trust and claim that the assessee had multiple activities so it not able to exempt u/s 10 (23C) (iiiad) for educational purpose. Accordingly, the exemption was denied, and the net profit was taken as a taxable income of the assessee. The addition was made Rs. 60,500/- for violation of section 40(a)(ia). But the assessee has claimed that

GURU NANAK DEV HEALTH & EDUCATION SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD (EXEMPTION), JALANDHAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

trust and claim that the assessee had multiple activities so it not able to exempt u/s 10 (23C) (iiiad) for educational purpose. Accordingly, the exemption was denied, and the net profit was taken as a taxable income of the assessee. The addition was made Rs. 60,500/- for violation of section 40(a)(ia). But the assessee has claimed that

GURU NANAK DEV HEALTH & EDUCATION SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS,), JALANDHAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

trust and claim that the assessee had multiple activities so it not able to exempt u/s 10 (23C) (iiiad) for educational purpose. Accordingly, the exemption was denied, and the net profit was taken as a taxable income of the assessee. The addition was made Rs. 60,500/- for violation of section 40(a)(ia). But the assessee has claimed that