RAM SARAN DASS KISHORI LAL CHARITABLE TRUST,AMRITSAR. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICE, AMRITSAR.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

depreciation amount to Rs.44,10,065/- and amount to Rs.10,000/- for personal use of car and telephone. But the ld. CIT(A) upheld the observation of the ld. AO that the status of the assessee is a AOP due to not registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The status of the assessee was changed from registered to unregistered trust

M/S RAM SARAN DASS KISHORI LAL CHARITABLE TRUST,AMRITSAR. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), AMRITSAR.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

depreciation amount to Rs.44,10,065/- and amount to Rs.10,000/- for personal use of car and telephone. But the ld. CIT(A) upheld the observation of the ld. AO that the status of the assessee is a AOP due to not registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The status of the assessee was changed from registered to unregistered trust

SH. RAM SHARAN DASS,AMRITSAR. vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,, AMRITSAR.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

depreciation amount to Rs.44,10,065/- and amount to Rs.10,000/- for personal use of car and telephone. But the ld. CIT(A) upheld the observation of the ld. AO that the status of the assessee is a AOP due to not registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The status of the assessee was changed from registered to unregistered trust

M/S RAM SARAN DASS KISHORI LAL CHARITABLE TRUST,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD ( EXEMPTIONS), AMRITSAR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

depreciation amount to Rs.44,10,065/- and amount to Rs.10,000/- for personal use of car and telephone. But the ld. CIT(A) upheld the observation of the ld. AO that the status of the assessee is a AOP due to not registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The status of the assessee was changed from registered to unregistered trust

M/S RAM SARAN DASS KISHORI LAL CHARITABLE TRUST,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- (EXEMPTIONS)), AMRITSAR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

depreciation amount to Rs.44,10,065/- and amount to Rs.10,000/- for personal use of car and telephone. But the ld. CIT(A) upheld the observation of the ld. AO that the status of the assessee is a AOP due to not registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The status of the assessee was changed from registered to unregistered trust

M/S RAM SARAN DASS KISHORI LAL CHARITABLE TRUST,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- (EXEMPTIONS), AMRITSAR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

depreciation amount to Rs.44,10,065/- and amount to Rs.10,000/- for personal use of car and telephone. But the ld. CIT(A) upheld the observation of the ld. AO that the status of the assessee is a AOP due to not registered u/s 12AA of the Act. The status of the assessee was changed from registered to unregistered trust

M/S STEP BY STEP JUNIOR SCHOOL SOCIETY,AMRITSAR. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Charitable Trust and Ors vs Union of India and Ors reported in 327 ITR 73. ITA 596/Amr/2016 9 10. Decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT(E) Chandigarh vs. Shree Mahavir Jain Society (Regd.) in Appeal No. 231 of 2016 order dated 11/09/2017. 17. On the contrary, the learned D.R. for the revenue had submitted that

SHIROMANI GURDWARA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I,

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenav.S. Cit – I Shirmoni Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee Amritsar Teja Singh Mundri Hall Sri Amritsar Pan:Aants1981K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Charitable trust v/s Union of India (2008) 307 ITR 226 (RAJ.) f. Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Social Service Centre (2001) 250 ITR 39 (AP) g. Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam vs CCIT (2001) 251 ITR 849 (AP)“ 6. Registration u/s 12AA: An issue raised by the Revenue during the course of argument. a. In this regard, it is pertinent to mention

THE OXFORD EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE SOCIETY,FARIDKOT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 583/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: N/A M/S The Oxford Educational & Vs. Cit(E), Charitable Society (Oxbridge Chandigarh. World School, Kotkapura) Hira Singh Nagar, Kotkapura, Faridkot (Punjab) [Pan: Aabtt6670Q] (Appellant) (Respendent)

charitable, are not sufficient for granting registration to the society under Section 12AA of the Act until and unless the authority, who grants the registration, satisfies himself that the activities of the trust or institution are genuine or not. To satisfy himself he can make such inquiry as he deem necessary. There is no bar under any provision

SHRI GURU NANAK DEV CHARITABLE TRUST,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

The appeal of the assesse is disposed of in the terms indicated as above

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

Charitable Trust, (Exemption), Jalandhar C/o Guru Nanak Dev Homeopathic Medical College, Hospital, Canal Road, Barewal, Ludhiana [PAN: AAATG 0708R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Priyanka Singla, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 20.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against

M/S PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES,,JALANDHAR vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

trust is not engaged in the charitable activities and therefore the claim of exemption under section 11 of the IT Act was denied. This finding of the Hon’ble ITAT still holds good and appeal filed by the appellant is pending before the honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court. Thus, considering all these factors. I hold that there

M/S.PUNJAB INSTITURE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

trust is not engaged in the charitable activities and therefore the claim of exemption under section 11 of the IT Act was denied. This finding of the Hon’ble ITAT still holds good and appeal filed by the appellant is pending before the honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court. Thus, considering all these factors. I hold that there

M/S.PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

trust is not engaged in the charitable activities and therefore the claim of exemption under section 11 of the IT Act was denied. This finding of the Hon’ble ITAT still holds good and appeal filed by the appellant is pending before the honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court. Thus, considering all these factors. I hold that there

M/S.PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

trust is not engaged in the charitable activities and therefore the claim of exemption under section 11 of the IT Act was denied. This finding of the Hon’ble ITAT still holds good and appeal filed by the appellant is pending before the honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court. Thus, considering all these factors. I hold that there

M/S. PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JALANDHAR

In the result, the ITA No

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

trust is not engaged in the charitable activities and therefore the claim of exemption under section 11 of the IT Act was denied. This finding of the Hon’ble ITAT still holds good and appeal filed by the appellant is pending before the honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court. Thus, considering all these factors. I hold that there

MESERS BAJAJ EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

charitable purposes (Educational Activities) carried out by it. Further, it is submitted that expenditures mentioned in column no. (3) above does not include any capital expenditure incurred by the applicant society but it includes only the revenue expenditure incurred by the applicant society in the respective year. However, the applicant society had claimed depreciation on the capital expenditure incurred

MESERS IMPROVEMENT TRUST ,FAZILKA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

trusts as envisaged by the Govt, of Punjab. Therefore is an allowable expenditure. I.T.A. No. 307/Asr/2018 4 Assessment Year: 2014-15 6. On the facts & in the circumstances ofthecase and in law, the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred by confirming the addition of Rs 6,09,41,639/- instead of loss