MAHARAJA RANJIT SINGH WAR MUSEUM SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXAMPTION), JALANDHAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 618/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

5); (c) is not utilized for the purposes of its accumulation within the period specified u/s. 11(2)(a); (d) is credited or paid to, inter alia, any trust or institution registered u/s. 12AA. That is, in any of the specified circumstances, the said deeming shall take effect. Section 12A(1) sets out the conditions subject to the satisfaction

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

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

section 10(23C).” 5. The assessee filed another reply giving the break up of the advance receipt during the financial year 2014-15 relating to the financial year 2015-16 in the reply dated 23.05.2016. ITA 596/Amr/2016 4 6. The CIT(E) was not satisfied with the replies and had issued another show cause notice on 26.08.2016 and sought various

BHAI DAYA SINGH JI BHAI HIMMAT SINGH JI NISHKAM SATSANG SABHA THROUGH ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE,LUDHIANA, PUNJAB vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

Accordingly. 22. In the combined result, both appeals (ITA No.728 & 732/SRT/2023) are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Khettra Mohan Roy

80(5) of the Act, the Tribunal may condone the delay in filing the Form No.10AB, u/s 80G(5) of the Act. Therefore, we are of the view that delay in filing the Form No.10AB, u/s 80G(5) should be condoned in the interest of justice. For that we rely on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court

BHAI DAYA SINGH JI BHAI DHARAM SINGH JI NISHKAM SATSANG SABHA,LUDHIANA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

Accordingly. 22. In the combined result, both appeals (ITA No.728 & 732/SRT/2023) are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Khettra Mohan Roy

80(5) of the Act, the Tribunal may condone the delay in filing the Form No.10AB, u/s 80G(5) of the Act. Therefore, we are of the view that delay in filing the Form No.10AB, u/s 80G(5) should be condoned in the interest of justice. For that we rely on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court

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

5 of the order has tried to find fault in the correspondence that complete documents had not been submitted and such fact have been wrongly interpreted, because of the following facts:- a). After the receipt of application on Form No. 10,, there is a letter, dated 21.05.1998 signed by the concerned Assessing Officer at page 14, asking for certain details

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

5 of the order has tried to find fault in the correspondence that complete documents had not been submitted and such fact have been wrongly interpreted, because of the following facts:- a). After the receipt of application on Form No. 10,, there is a letter, dated 21.05.1998 signed by the concerned Assessing Officer at page 14, asking for certain details

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

5 of the order has tried to find fault in the correspondence that complete documents had not been submitted and such fact have been wrongly interpreted, because of the following facts:- a). After the receipt of application on Form No. 10,, there is a letter, dated 21.05.1998 signed by the concerned Assessing Officer at page 14, asking for certain details

M/S MADAD CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,AMRITSAR vs. COMM OF INCOME TAX ( EXAMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 225/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year:

charitable in nature. The approval, he would continue, rather than being made with reference to the objects of the applicant-trust, ought to be qua the satisfaction (or otherwise) of the conditions laid down in law, i.e., as per clauses (i) to (v) of section 80(G)(5

M/S ALNOOR CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL TRUST,SRINAGAR vs. CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

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

Charitable Educational The CIT (Exemptions) Trust Chandigarh Dana Mazar, Safakadal, Srinagar-190001 PAN: AAETA5025F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Smt. Rajinder Kaur, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 08/06/2023 Date of Pronouncement : 13/06/2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The captioned appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the learned principal Commissioner of income

ATAM PARGAS SOCIAL WELFARE COUNCIL,LUDHIANA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita No.637(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year:

80(G)(5)(vi) of the Act unless there is non-fulfillment of conditions specified is section 80G(5). 2.1 That the Ld CIT (Exemptions) erred in facts and in law by denying registration u/s 80G of the Act on the ground that at the time of granting registration it is to be ensured that the institution is ‘established

SHRI GAUSHALA BHAWAN CHARITABLE TRUST,MANSA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

80&81/Asr/2023 Assessment Years: N/A Sh. Gaushala Bhawan, Vs. CIT (Exemptions) Charitable Trust, Water Works Chandigarh. Road, Mansa. [PAN:AAATS4896E] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 26.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement 01.08.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 78 to 81/Asr/2023 2 Assessment Years: N/A ORDER Per:, Bench: A Batch of four appeals

SHRI HAR HAR MAHADEV SEWA MANDAL ,MANSA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

80&81/Asr/2023 Assessment Years: N/A Sh. Gaushala Bhawan, Vs. CIT (Exemptions) Charitable Trust, Water Works Chandigarh. Road, Mansa. [PAN:AAATS4896E] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 26.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement 01.08.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 78 to 81/Asr/2023 2 Assessment Years: N/A ORDER Per:, Bench: A Batch of four appeals

SHRI HAR HAR MAHADEV SEWA MANDAL,MANSA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

80&81/Asr/2023 Assessment Years: N/A Sh. Gaushala Bhawan, Vs. CIT (Exemptions) Charitable Trust, Water Works Chandigarh. Road, Mansa. [PAN:AAATS4896E] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 26.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement 01.08.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 78 to 81/Asr/2023 2 Assessment Years: N/A ORDER Per:, Bench: A Batch of four appeals

SHRI GAUSHALA BHAWAN CHARITABLE TRUST,MANSA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

80&81/Asr/2023 Assessment Years: N/A Sh. Gaushala Bhawan, Vs. CIT (Exemptions) Charitable Trust, Water Works Chandigarh. Road, Mansa. [PAN:AAATS4896E] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 26.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement 01.08.2023 I.T.A. Nos. 78 to 81/Asr/2023 2 Assessment Years: N/A ORDER Per:, Bench: A Batch of four appeals

M/S GURU RAM DASS EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,BATHINDA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 598/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: N.A.

section 80(G)(vi) approval, in Adesh Foundation (in ITA No. 665/Asr/2017, dated 18/3/2019), where the tribunal, after an extensive discussion in the matter, held that inquiry into the need for donations is not precluded and, indeed, relevant, taking into account the entirety of the facts and circumstances. However, the denial of approval could only be on some firm footing

S.M.D.R.S.D COLLEGIATE SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL ( RUN),PATHANKOT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T6AX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

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

Charitable Trust Vs. CIT-II Amritsar (ITA No 594 (ASR) 2013), he held that the benefit of registration under section 12AA of the Act, cannot be granted to a trust controlled by a single family. The powers of keeping the society properties and rights in own hands of the family invite the coverage of the aforementioned decision. Accordingly, he held

S.M.D.R.S.D COLLAGE OF EDUCATION( RUN),PATHANKOT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

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

Charitable Trust Vs. CIT-II Amritsar (ITA No 594 (ASR) 2013), he held that the benefit of registration under section 12AA of the Act, cannot be granted to a trust controlled by a single family. The powers of keeping the society properties and rights in own hands of the family invite the coverage of the aforementioned decision. Accordingly, he held