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, has taken the same view. Page 57- 70. The Bangalore Bench of the ITAT, after considering the number of judgments have followed the judgment of ‘Apex Court’ about the deemed registration, which copy has been placed at pages 57 to 70 I.T.A Nos. 383, 139 & 125/ASR/2018 & 2020 7 of Paper Book. Relevant pages are 69 to 70, in which

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, has taken the same view. Page 57- 70. The Bangalore Bench of the ITAT, after considering the number of judgments have followed the judgment of ‘Apex Court’ about the deemed registration, which copy has been placed at pages 57 to 70 I.T.A Nos. 383, 139 & 125/ASR/2018 & 2020 7 of Paper Book. Relevant pages are 69 to 70, in which

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, has taken the same view. Page 57- 70. The Bangalore Bench of the ITAT, after considering the number of judgments have followed the judgment of ‘Apex Court’ about the deemed registration, which copy has been placed at pages 57 to 70 I.T.A Nos. 383, 139 & 125/ASR/2018 & 2020 7 of Paper Book. Relevant pages are 69 to 70, in which

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)

70,285.56 56,47,69,960.80 39. As the predominant purpose and object of the Assessee are to manage the property, do charitable activities by way of imparting / running educational institutions, organizing lunger, medical camp, hospital etc.; therefore, the activities of the Assessee could not be termed as being done only for the benefit of particular community/ religion hence

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. 8.1 We find that there is no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), so, the ground of the revenue is dismissed. In the result, the grounds of the revenue 1 to 5 are dismissed. Ground No. 6 is general in nature. ITA 89/Asr/2020 is mutatis mutandis applicable to ITA Nos. 87,88 & 90/Asr/2020 and follow

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. 8.1 We find that there is no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), so, the ground of the revenue is dismissed. In the result, the grounds of the revenue 1 to 5 are dismissed. Ground No. 6 is general in nature. ITA 89/Asr/2020 is mutatis mutandis applicable to ITA Nos. 87,88 & 90/Asr/2020 and follow

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. 8.1 We find that there is no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), so, the ground of the revenue is dismissed. In the result, the grounds of the revenue 1 to 5 are dismissed. Ground No. 6 is general in nature. ITA 89/Asr/2020 is mutatis mutandis applicable to ITA Nos. 87,88 & 90/Asr/2020 and follow

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. 8.1 We find that there is no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), so, the ground of the revenue is dismissed. In the result, the grounds of the revenue 1 to 5 are dismissed. Ground No. 6 is general in nature. ITA 89/Asr/2020 is mutatis mutandis applicable to ITA Nos. 87,88 & 90/Asr/2020 and follow

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. 8.1 We find that there is no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), so, the ground of the revenue is dismissed. In the result, the grounds of the revenue 1 to 5 are dismissed. Ground No. 6 is general in nature. ITA 89/Asr/2020 is mutatis mutandis applicable to ITA Nos. 87,88 & 90/Asr/2020 and follow

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. 8.1 We find that there is no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), so, the ground of the revenue is dismissed. In the result, the grounds of the revenue 1 to 5 are dismissed. Ground No. 6 is general in nature. ITA 89/Asr/2020 is mutatis mutandis applicable to ITA Nos. 87,88 & 90/Asr/2020 and follow

MESERS PEER PANCHAL EDUCATIONAL AND WELFARE TRUST ,JAMMU AND KASHMIR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

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

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

section 12AA pertains to the registration of the Trust and not to assess of what a trust has actually done and the term activities in the provision includes proposed activities. That is to say, the registering authority is bound to consider whether the objects of the Trust are genuinely charitable in nature and whether the activities which the trust proposed

GURU TEG BAHADUR EDUATIONAL TRUST,JALANDHAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 301/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2018-19

70,278/-, and Rs. 1,60,19,787/- respectively. Further, perusal of the Income & Expenditure account trust reveals that the net surplus obtained from the school is reflected as the income of the trust, showing the total income of the applicant trust at Rs. 24,51,278/-, Rs. 8 I.T.A. No. 301/Asr/2018

SANT MAHESH MUNI JI BOREWALE WELFARE SOCIETY,MOGA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS) WARD, JALANDHAR

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

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

section 11(2) of Income Tax act, 1961 for submission of the notice in the prescribed manner to the assessing authority and in the absence of any express or by clearly implied delegation to the rule making authority of any power to impose time limit. Such time limit prescribed in the rule 17 for submission of Form

M/S. LEH NUTRITION PROJECT,,LEH LADKH vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

70,265 (d) PIA Bathc-6 4,97,390 (e) PIA Batch-8 9,29,650 Total — 49,35,623 3 Leh Nutrition Project v. DCIT 6. That Id CIT(A) has wrongly ignored that no addition was ever made in the case of appellant since inception as ‘NGO’ on this issue, by Income Tax Department. 7. That order

SUKHMANI SOCIETY FOR CITIZEN SERVICES,BATHINDA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BATHINDA

In the result, the assessees’ appeal is allowed, and the Revenue’s appeals are disposed of accordingly

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 141/(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year:

charitable purpose’. 3. Before us, the ld. Authorized Representative (AR), the assessee’s counsel, would base his argument on the restricted scope of section 12AA(3), which reads as under: ‘Procedure for registration 12AA. (3) Where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (b) of sub-section (1) or has obtained registration at any time under

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA vs. M/S. SUKHMANI SOCIETY FOR CITIZEN SERVICES,, BATHINDA

In the result, the assessees’ appeal is allowed, and the Revenue’s appeals are disposed of accordingly

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 141/(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year:

charitable purpose’. 3. Before us, the ld. Authorized Representative (AR), the assessee’s counsel, would base his argument on the restricted scope of section 12AA(3), which reads as under: ‘Procedure for registration 12AA. (3) Where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (b) of sub-section (1) or has obtained registration at any time under

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA vs. M/S. SUKHMANI SOCIETY FOR CITIZEN SERVICES,, BATHINDA

In the result, the assessees’ appeal is allowed, and the Revenue’s appeals are disposed of accordingly

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 141/(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year:

charitable purpose’. 3. Before us, the ld. Authorized Representative (AR), the assessee’s counsel, would base his argument on the restricted scope of section 12AA(3), which reads as under: ‘Procedure for registration 12AA. (3) Where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (b) of sub-section (1) or has obtained registration at any time under

THE THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BATHINDA vs. M/S. SUKHMANI SOCIETY FOR CITIZEN SERVICES,, BATHINDA

In the result, the assessees’ appeal is allowed, and the Revenue’s appeals are disposed of accordingly

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 141/(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year:

charitable purpose’. 3. Before us, the ld. Authorized Representative (AR), the assessee’s counsel, would base his argument on the restricted scope of section 12AA(3), which reads as under: ‘Procedure for registration 12AA. (3) Where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (b) of sub-section (1) or has obtained registration at any time under