DODDABALLAPUR PLANNING AUTHORITY,BANGALORE vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, WARD-3, BANGALORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

charitable purposes. Section 12 is in the nature of an Explanation of section 11. Section 12A provides that provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall not apply in relation to income of any trust or institution unless certain conditions are satisfied, one of which is clause (a), the same is reproduced as under: "12A. Conditions as to registration of trusts

M/S. VIJAYANAGAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST,BENGALURU vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BENGALURU

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2019-20

AA (4) of the act, where the trust or an institution who have been granted registration under the provisions of section 12 (1) (b) or under the section 12A of the act and subsequently if it is found that the activities of the trust or institution are being carried out in a manner that the provisions of section

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

trust cannot be\nwithdrawn retrospectively by invoking the provisions of section 12AB\nof the Act. He submits that though this proposition is applicable for\nthe first 3 years of the appeal and not for AY 2022-23 .\n27. For this proposition he referred to the provisions of section 12AB(4)\nwhich is enacted w.e.f. 1.4.2022. He therefore submitted that this

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

trust for AY 2015-16, 2016-17 &\n2019-20 is bad in law. He also submitted that this issue is covered by\nfollowing decisions over and above the decision of the Bangalore\nBench stated above.\ni) Pacific Academy of Higher Education and Research Society\nversus the PCIT (Central), in ITA No. 04 & 05/Jodh/2020\ndated 25 January 2023 wherein

KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. DCIT-(EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2016-17

aa)[ the person in receipt of the income has made an application for registration of the trust or institution on or after the 1st day of June, 2007 in the prescribed form and manner to the Commissioner and such trust or institution is registered under section 12AA;] [Inserted by Act 22 of 2007, Section 8 (w.e.f. 1.6.2007).] (ab)the person

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

Charitable Trust by any\nregistered transfer/sale deed. Mr. P Shyamaraju in his sworn statement has\nconfirmed that the properties have been purchased in his name and in name of his\nson (Mr. Umesh S. Raju) in their individual capacities, by utilizing the funds given by\nthe Trust. Mr. P. Shyamaraju has admitted that the titles of said properties and legal

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 EXEMPTIONS , BANGALORE vs. M/S CENTRE FPR CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR PLATFORMS , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Centre For Cellular & Molecular Platforms, The Income Tax Officer (E), Post Bag No. 6505, Ward -1 , Vs. G.K.V.K. P.O. Bangalore. Bellary Road, Bangalore – 560 065. Pan: Aadcc8572D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ujjwal Kumar, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 14.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2019

1) Conditions as to registration of trusts, etc.- The provisions of section 11 and section 12 shall not apply in relation to the income of any trust or institution unless the following conditions are fulfilled, namely :- (aa) the person in receipt of the income has made an application for registration of the trust or institution on or after

ACHARYA SRI TULSI MAHAPRAGYA SEVA KENDRA CHARITABLE TRUST ,BANGALORE vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

1) of section 12A\nof the Act on 17.3.2022 from assessment year 2022-23 to\n assessment year 2026-27 vide URN No. AACTA7870QE20219.\nFurther, the assessee trust has also been granted provisional\napproval under clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of\nsection 80G of the Act on 23.3.2022 w.e.f. 23.3.2022 to assessment\nyear 2024-25 vide

THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - (EXEMPTIONS ) CIRCLE - 1, MANGALURU vs. M/S A. SHAMA RAO FOUNDATION, MANGALURU

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm I.T.A. No.1464/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. A. Shama Rao Foundation, Income-Tax (Exemptions), Circle- 13-2-116, Hotel Srinivas Building, 1, Mangaluru G.H.S. Road, Mangaluru-575 001. [Pan:Aaata 1629 B] (Revenue-Appellant) (Assessee -Respondent) Revenue By Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr) Assessee By Shri V. Srinivasan, Adv. Date Of Hearing 09/11/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 03/12/2020 O R D E R

12A of the Act, and consequently the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue appeal. Similar view was taken by ITAT, Agra in the case of ITO v. Gaudiya Granth Anuved Trust reported in (2014) 48 taxmann.com 348 (Agra- Trib.) wherein Tribunal held as follows: “Now, the question arises whether such corpus donation is taxable as income or not even in the cases

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

AA of the Income-Tax Act. 02. At the request of the assessee, we take the lead appeal for AY 2015-16 in ITA No. 2106/Bang/2024. 03. The brief facts of the case show that assessee, charitable Trust was established in 2003 and registration was granted u/s. 12AA of the Act on 19.3.2003 and subsequently u/s. 12AB

CITY HOSPITAL CHARITABLE TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

12A of the Act has already been granted after verifying the genuineness of the activities carried out by the Assessee trust. The issues, whether receipts in the form of tuition and other fees, hostel fees do not fall under the definition of donation are not at all relevant in the present case of the assessee trust. City Hospital Charitable Trust

DHWANI SHRISTI FOUNDATION ,BAGANALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

12A (1)(ac)(iii) of the Act by filing form 10AB on 20.4.2024. On receipt of the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act, the ld. CIT (E) assigned the case to the JAO for verification. On perusal of submission made by the assessee both the Range head and ld. JAO did not recommend for the registration mainly

DHWANI SHRISTI FOUNDATION,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

12A (1)(ac)(iii) of the Act by filing form 10AB on 20.4.2024. On receipt of the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act, the ld. CIT (E) assigned the case to the JAO for verification. On perusal of submission made by the assessee both the Range head and ld. JAO did not recommend for the registration mainly

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

12A. The legal dictum is that the retrospective applicability can either be expressly provided for or can be inferred by necessary implication from the language employed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Zile Singh v. State of Haryana (2004) 8 SCC 1 at Para 15, held as follows: "It is not necessary that an express provision

ANUGRAHA EDUCATION TRUST,SULLIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

AA) or clause (23-C)] [ Substituted by Act 11 of 1987, Section 35, for\nor clause (23-C)" (w.e.f. 1.4.1988).] of section 10:\n[Provided that where an institution or fund derives any income, being profits and\ngains of business, the condition that such income would not be liable to inclusion\nin its total income under the provisions of section

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

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

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