SHREE AMAR KSHATRIYA SABHA CHARITABLE TRUST ,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- ( EXEMPTIONS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 492/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21

Trust in ITA No.1095/Chny/2024 dated 30/08/2024, 167 Taxmann.com 326 (Chennai-Trib.) Relying on the above decisions the ld. AR submitted that since in the instant case, the return has been filed by the assessee within the time allowed u/s 139 ( which covers sections u/s 139(4)/ 139(4A)) , of the Act, which is as per the clarification laid down

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

Charitable or religious trust- Registration of (Deemed registration)- Whether where assessee- society filed an application under section 12 A for grant of registration on 24.02.2003 and same was not responded to within six months, registration of application was to be deemed to have taken effect from 24.08.20030 Held, yes.” 4. Even, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case

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

Charitable or religious trust- Registration of (Deemed registration)- Whether where assessee- society filed an application under section 12 A for grant of registration on 24.02.2003 and same was not responded to within six months, registration of application was to be deemed to have taken effect from 24.08.20030 Held, yes.” 4. Even, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case

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

Charitable or religious trust- Registration of (Deemed registration)- Whether where assessee- society filed an application under section 12 A for grant of registration on 24.02.2003 and same was not responded to within six months, registration of application was to be deemed to have taken effect from 24.08.20030 Held, yes.” 4. Even, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case

DATA SHER SINGH SALARIA CHARITABLE TRUST,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), JAMMU

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

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No.225 & 551/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: N/A Data Sher Singh Salaria Vs. Ito Ward-1(1), Charitable Trust, Sohagpur, Jammu. Arnia, Jammu & Kashmir. [Pan:-Aadtd3226G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

4. Now the matter is in appeal before the tribunal on the grounds contained in the memorandum of appeal. 5. The Ld. AR of the assessee filed a paper book containing 164 pages, consisting of copies of provisional registration certificate u/s 12A (1) in form 10AC dated 6th April 2022, copy of application for final registration in form 10AB, details

DATA SHER SINGH SALARIA CHARITABLE TRUST,DATA SHER SINGH SALARIA CHARIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1), JAMMU

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

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No.225 & 551/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: N/A Data Sher Singh Salaria Vs. Ito Ward-1(1), Charitable Trust, Sohagpur, Jammu. Arnia, Jammu & Kashmir. [Pan:-Aadtd3226G] (Appellant) (Respondent)

4. Now the matter is in appeal before the tribunal on the grounds contained in the memorandum of appeal. 5. The Ld. AR of the assessee filed a paper book containing 164 pages, consisting of copies of provisional registration certificate u/s 12A (1) in form 10AC dated 6th April 2022, copy of application for final registration in form 10AB, details

RAHUL KHINDRI,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 (1), AMRITSAR

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 37/Asr/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Rahul Khindri, बनाम A.O., Cpc, 2157, Bazar Sirki Banda, Banglore Katra Dullo, Amritsar Indra Nagar, 143001 स्थधयी लेखध सं./Pan No: Apfpk9150F अपीलधथी/Appellant प्रत्यथी/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) निर्धाररती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Rohit Kapoor, Ca रधजस्व की ओर से/ Revenue By : Mrs. Neelam Sharma, Sr.Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.12.2024 उदघोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.03.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.07.2023 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- 1. That The Ld. C1T(A) Vide Order U/S 250(6) Dated 31.07.2023 Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ao In Not Providing The Benefit Of Lower Tax As Per Section 115Bac Due To The Fact That Form 10 Ie Was Not Filed Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Return U/S 139(1) I.E. 31.12.2021. 37-Asr-2024 Rahul Khindri, Amritsar 2

section 139(1) - Whether since requirement of filing Form 10-IE was directory in nature and not mandatory and it was sufficient compliance if said form was before Assessing Officer at time of assessment, Assessing Officer was to be directed to take into consideration Form 10-IE filed by assessee - Held, yes [Para 10.6] [In favour of assessee

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

139. Search and seizure was conducted u/s 132 at the premises of the assessee on 08.09.2016. The assessee declared Rs.7.50 crore during search and paid the tax accordingly. The addition was made on basis of the unsigned draft agreement to sell, merely on a plain paper in which the amounts were duly cut and trimmed dated 25.09.2015 between M/s Amar

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

139. Search and seizure was conducted u/s 132 at the premises of the assessee on 08.09.2016. The assessee declared Rs.7.50 crore during search and paid the tax accordingly. The addition was made on basis of the unsigned draft agreement to sell, merely on a plain paper in which the amounts were duly cut and trimmed dated 25.09.2015 between M/s Amar

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

139. Search and seizure was conducted u/s 132 at the premises of the assessee on 08.09.2016. The assessee declared Rs.7.50 crore during search and paid the tax accordingly. The addition was made on basis of the unsigned draft agreement to sell, merely on a plain paper in which the amounts were duly cut and trimmed dated 25.09.2015 between M/s Amar

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

139. Search and seizure was conducted u/s 132 at the premises of the assessee on 08.09.2016. The assessee declared Rs.7.50 crore during search and paid the tax accordingly. The addition was made on basis of the unsigned draft agreement to sell, merely on a plain paper in which the amounts were duly cut and trimmed dated 25.09.2015 between M/s Amar

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

139. Search and seizure was conducted u/s 132 at the premises of the assessee on 08.09.2016. The assessee declared Rs.7.50 crore during search and paid the tax accordingly. The addition was made on basis of the unsigned draft agreement to sell, merely on a plain paper in which the amounts were duly cut and trimmed dated 25.09.2015 between M/s Amar

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

139. Search and seizure was conducted u/s 132 at the premises of the assessee on 08.09.2016. The assessee declared Rs.7.50 crore during search and paid the tax accordingly. The addition was made on basis of the unsigned draft agreement to sell, merely on a plain paper in which the amounts were duly cut and trimmed dated 25.09.2015 between M/s Amar

IDARA AUQAF ASLAMIA TRUST,JAMMU & KASAHMIR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD ANANTNAG, JAMMU AND KASHMIR

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

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

section 12AA by Finance Act, 2014. Thus these provisions clearly have retrospective effect and the worthy CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition made by the AO. 6. That this is an admitted fact that the aims and objectives of the trust are charitable which includes education also and the authorities below have never been able to establish

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

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 139(4C)(e) and as such the returns were filed from AY 2016-17. The assessee was all along maintaining duly audited accounts which were mandatory as per law. In support, he placed reliance on the few decisions cited below: I.T.A No.476/Asr/2017 1. CIT v Shri Shirdi Sai Darbar Charitable Trust 395 ITR 567(P & H), Pages

INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. MS CHANDAR BHAGA EDUCATIONAL TRUST, JAMMU

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

Bench: Sh. Vikram Singh Yadav & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

Charitable Trust, Akhnoor Road Jammu, J&K 180012 Purkhoo Camp Domana, Jammu 181206, J & K [PAN: AAATC 5566D] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by : Sh. Vinay Jamwal, C.A. : Respondent by Sh. Sunil Gautam, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 03.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 09.01.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the ld. Addl

DERA SWAMI JAGAT GIRI TRUST ( REGD),PATHANKOT vs. COMMISSIONER ODF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assesse society is allowed in the terms indicated as above

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

trust is genuine and charitable in nature and have fulfilled all the conditions laid down under the law. 3 ITA No.118 /(Asr)/20 9. That it is prayed that the exemption u/s 12A may kindly be allowed in the interest of natural justice. 10. That any other ground of appeal which may be argued at the time of hearing

B.R CHARITABLE TRUST,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)- WARD, JAMMU

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

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

Charitable Trust, Sector -6, Vs. ITO, (Exemption), Gangyal Jammu-180003 Ward-Jammu. [PAN: AABTB4276G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None. (Written submission) Respondent by Sh. Surendra Nath, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 10.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement 18.10.2022 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), Jammu

INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTIONS), AMRITSAR vs. M/S RADHA RAMAN CHARITABLE TRUST, GURDASPUR

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

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

charitable trust as defined u/s 2(24) r.w.s 2(15) r.w.s 11 and "total income" as defined u/s 2(45) r.w.s 5 of Act, CIT(A) has erred in holding the total income of the assessee trust at Rs.2,48,075/- in view of the provisions of section 11&12 r.w.s 2(24) (ii)(a) of the Act. 2. Whether