DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELLARI vs. M/S. NAVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST, RAICHUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2009-10

charitable or religious trust or institution that has been registered u/s 12A), Form 10BB (Audit report under section 10(23C) of the Act) and the Form 3CD. The afore-mentioned facts were also brought under the order of the CIT(A). The assessee is claiming exemptions available to both 10(23C)(vi) and 12A registered entities and moreover the assessee

M/S. RUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL , BENGALURU

sections of people without any\ndiscrimination of caste, creed race or religion.\n(c) To assist, promote, establish, run, takeover and or manage orphanage, rescue and/or\nhalf-way homes for destitute, aged and the inform and/or senior citizens without\ndiscrimination of caste, creed, race, religion, status or standing.\n(d) To give out grants, scholarships, stipends, rewards, awards, certificates, financial

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1,, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

charitable purpose. 16. What survives to be determined is whether any of BIS's activities fall within the latter and larger category of "involved in the carrying on of any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business". The expressions "any activity," "rendering any service" and "in relation to any trade, commerce or business" imply

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1),, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

charitable purpose. 16. What survives to be determined is whether any of BIS's activities fall within the latter and larger category of "involved in the carrying on of any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business". The expressions "any activity," "rendering any service" and "in relation to any trade, commerce or business" imply

M/S. UDUPI NIRMITHI KENDRA,UDUPI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, MANGALORE

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

charitable purpose. 16. What survives to be determined is whether any of BIS's activities fall within the latter and larger category of "involved in the carrying on of any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business". The expressions "any activity," "rendering any service" and "in relation to any trade, commerce or business" imply

M/S. UDUPI NIRMITHI KEDRA,UDUPI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE - 1, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

charitable purpose. 16. What survives to be determined is whether any of BIS's activities fall within the latter and larger category of "involved in the carrying on of any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business". The expressions "any activity," "rendering any service" and "in relation to any trade, commerce or business" imply

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1),, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

charitable purpose. 16. What survives to be determined is whether any of BIS's activities fall within the latter and larger category of "involved in the carrying on of any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business". The expressions "any activity," "rendering any service" and "in relation to any trade, commerce or business" imply

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1),, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

charitable purpose. 16. What survives to be determined is whether any of BIS's activities fall within the latter and larger category of "involved in the carrying on of any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business". The expressions "any activity," "rendering any service" and "in relation to any trade, commerce or business" imply

M/S. DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE -1, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

charitable purpose. 16. What survives to be determined is whether any of BIS's activities fall within the latter and larger category of "involved in the carrying on of any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business". The expressions "any activity," "rendering any service" and "in relation to any trade, commerce or business" imply

INDEPENDENT AND PUBLIC SPIRITED MEDIA FOUNDATION ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (CENTRAL), BENGALURU

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : Na

CHARITABLE TRUST [2019] 109 TAXMANN.COM 258 / 267 TAXMAN 16 ( BOM) was upheld. Thus, he held that whole the trust cannot be held to be non-genuine, and the registration cannot be cancelled. 30. Thus, he submitted that the order passed by the learned CIT is not sustainable cancelling the registration granted to the assessee trust under section

DCIT, UDUPI vs. M/S MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION, MANIPAL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

Charitable Trust, Bangalore in ITA No.676(B)/2014 and submitted that the Tribunal after considering the judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in case of Lissie Medical Institutions (Supra) has decided this issue in favour of assessee. 11. We have heard the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. So far as the facts relating

ASST.C.I.T., MANGALORE vs. VISHWACHETAN FOUNDATION, HUBLI

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

charitable institution which are run on non-profit business and achieve the objective of the trust similar to or consistent with the assessee's trust for fulfilling the objectives of the assessee-trust and therefore no addition can be made in respect of the amount advanced to the Vidya Bharati Foundation without charging interest. 6. We have heard the learned

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE ACADEMY FOR MANAGEMENT EDUCATION, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for both Assessment Years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are dismissed

Section 11 of the Act even though the amounts were disbursed by the Trust after the accounting year. Further, the amounts debited to the income and expenditure account but which were not actually disbursed were shown as liabilities in the balance sheet. The Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court which upholding the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal

M/S ALLARD EDUCATION SOCIETY,BANGALORE vs. DDIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed as indicated above

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T. A. No.355/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/S. Allard Education Society, No.441, St. Thomas Town, Hennur Road, Bangalore-560 084 …. Appellant. Pan Aaata 3937E Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle 17(1), Bangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri V. Srinivasan, C.A. Respondent By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jcit (D.R.) Date Of Hearing : 6.10.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2015. O R D E R Per Shri Jason P. Boaz, A.M. : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Ltu, Bangalore Dt.29.10.2014 Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Facts Of The Case, Briefly, Are As Under :- 2.1 The Assessee Is A Public Religious Cum Public Charitable Institution Registered Under The Karnataka Societies Act, 1960 & Also Registered Under Section 12A Of The Income Tax Act Vide Order No.Pro 718/10A/Vol.A1/A-280 Dt.23.4.1975 As A Religious-Cum-Educational Institution. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2011-12 On 27.3.2012

charitable institution registered under the Karnataka Societies Act, 1960 and also registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act vide order No.PRO 718/10A/Vol.A1/A-280 dt.23.4.1975 as a religious-cum-educational institution. The assessee filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2011-12 on 27.3.2012 2 declaring a taxable income of NIL after claiming application of income and accumulation under

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S VENKATESHA EDUCATION SOCIETY , BANGALORE

In the result all the appeals of revenue, viz

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.50 To 56 & 455/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2014-15 & 2013-14 Respectively

section 13(1)(c) are applicable. The same principle was upheld in the following cases:- • DDIT (Exemptions) v Chaitanya Memorial Education Society, ITAT Hyderabad, 30 ITR (T)120 • Travancore Education Society Vs. CIT, 58 taxmann.com 40, ITAT, Cochin • Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust V CIT, Kozhikoke, 49 taxmann.com 426, ITAT Cochin • Further, the assessee trust is also not run according

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S. VENKATESHA EDUCATION, BENGALURU

In the result all the appeals of revenue, viz

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.50 To 56 & 455/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2014-15 & 2013-14 Respectively

section 13(1)(c) are applicable. The same principle was upheld in the following cases:- • DDIT (Exemptions) v Chaitanya Memorial Education Society, ITAT Hyderabad, 30 ITR (T)120 • Travancore Education Society Vs. CIT, 58 taxmann.com 40, ITAT, Cochin • Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust V CIT, Kozhikoke, 49 taxmann.com 426, ITAT Cochin • Further, the assessee trust is also not run according

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S VENKATESHA EDUCATION SOCIETY , BANGALORE

In the result all the appeals of revenue, viz

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.50 To 56 & 455/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2014-15 & 2013-14 Respectively

section 13(1)(c) are applicable. The same principle was upheld in the following cases:- • DDIT (Exemptions) v Chaitanya Memorial Education Society, ITAT Hyderabad, 30 ITR (T)120 • Travancore Education Society Vs. CIT, 58 taxmann.com 40, ITAT, Cochin • Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust V CIT, Kozhikoke, 49 taxmann.com 426, ITAT Cochin • Further, the assessee trust is also not run according

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S VENKATESHA EDUCATION SOCIETY , BANGALORE

In the result all the appeals of revenue, viz

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranita Nos.50 To 56 & 455/Bang/2018 Assessment Years : 2008-09 To 2014-15 & 2013-14 Respectively

section 13(1)(c) are applicable. The same principle was upheld in the following cases:- • DDIT (Exemptions) v Chaitanya Memorial Education Society, ITAT Hyderabad, 30 ITR (T)120 • Travancore Education Society Vs. CIT, 58 taxmann.com 40, ITAT, Cochin • Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust V CIT, Kozhikoke, 49 taxmann.com 426, ITAT Cochin • Further, the assessee trust is also not run according