M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

DCIT, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

THE DCIT, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

M/S SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR vs. M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

M/S. SADHU SINGH HAMDARD TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

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

11(1)(a) of the Act and also to examine the question of admissibility of deduction in respect of payments made to 4 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt. CIT& Ors. certain persons in terms of section 13(3)(c) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced hereunder

MESERS SHRI SWAMI SHANKARNATH PARVAT CHARITABLE AND WELFARE TRUST ,KAPURTHALA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the assessee appeal is allowed

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 602/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: N.A.

11 and 12 of the Act. In other words, if it appears that the objects of the trust and its activities are not genuine that is to say not charitable the Commissioner is entitled to refuse and in fact, bound to refuse such registration 12. Since section 12AA pertains to the registration of the Trust and not to assess

M/S SANTOSH FOUNDATION ,RAMPURA PHUL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 11 depends on the application of such fund for the charitable activities by the trust only. Thus, the CIT(E) is empowered to satisfy himself only about two factors i.e. the objects of the trust and the genuineness of the activities of the trust or institution and such powers does not extend to the eligibility of the trust/institution

SH. VISHWA MITTER SEKHRI CHARITABLE SOCIETY,BATALA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTION), AMRITSAR.

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 75/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2007-08

11 and 13 of the income tax Act in the light of the insertion of the proviso to section 12 A of the income tax Act more particularly when the assessee was granted the registration on 25 September 2009, and prior thereto the assessee was a having the approval under section 10(23) of the Act. 3 Whether the case

M/S BABA BANDA BAHADUR MEMORIAL AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,FARIDKOT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 66/Asr/2017 Assessment Year:2015-16

Trust in CWP No. 6031 of 2009. He has further discussed in Para 9 on page no. 4 of the impugned order where he referred to show cause 11 I.T.A. No. 66/Asr/2017 letter dated 13.12.2016 wherein certain details and clarifications were called for (APB, Pg,17-18). On the reply of the Assessee, the CIT(Ex.) stated that the applicant

M/S ANWAR SULTANA EDUCTIONAL TRUST,SRINAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 140/Asr/2020 Assessment Year:N/A M/S Anwar Sultana Educational Vs. Cit(E), Trust, 29 Housing Colony Sanat Chandigarh. Nagar, Srinagar. [Pan: Aafta2878M] (Appellant) (Respendent)

Charitable Trust is a trust solely created for imparting education as per the relevant clause of the Deed for creation of the Trust. The appellant had applied for Registration U/S 12AA of the Income Tax Act 1961 before Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions Chandigarh which has been denied. Then the appellant 4 I.T.A. No. 140/Asr/2020 appealed to the Honorable

M/S LORD MAHAVIR HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLAGE & HOSPITAL,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- ( EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Trust 96 taxmann.com 356 (Kerala) as decided by the Kerala High Court is held as under: “4. Since the assessee is engaged in the activity of imparting education since its establishment, it moved two applications, one on 08-10-1998 seeking recognition under section 80G of the Act and other on 25-05-1999 seeking registration under section 12A with

LORD MAHAVIRA HOMOEOPHATIC MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL ,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Trust 96 taxmann.com 356 (Kerala) as decided by the Kerala High Court is held as under: “4. Since the assessee is engaged in the activity of imparting education since its establishment, it moved two applications, one on 08-10-1998 seeking recognition under section 80G of the Act and other on 25-05-1999 seeking registration under section 12A with

M/S LORD MAHAVIRA HOMEOP[ATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE & HOSPITAL ,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- ( EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Trust 96 taxmann.com 356 (Kerala) as decided by the Kerala High Court is held as under: “4. Since the assessee is engaged in the activity of imparting education since its establishment, it moved two applications, one on 08-10-1998 seeking recognition under section 80G of the Act and other on 25-05-1999 seeking registration under section 12A with