ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU vs. CMR JNANADHARA TRUST, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmed

13, Section 11 not to apply in certain cases, (1) Nothing contained in section I"F or section 12 shall operate so as to exclude from the total Income of the previous year of the person in receipt thereof (c) in the case of a trust for char/table or religious purposes or a charitable

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

1) of section 13 of IT Act 1961. 5. That, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(E) was erred in cancellation of registration of the trust u/s 12A(ab) of IT Act 1961, even though objects of the trust are charitable

SADIYA EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST vs. CIT,

In the result, the assessee's appeals are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P. Boazi.T. A. Nos.422 & 1632/Bang/2013 M/S. Sadiya Educational & Charitable Trust, Mattadgadde Road, Sadiya Nagar, Shiralkoppa-577 428 …. Appellant.

charitable and religious trust only for the purposes of a particular community and therefore, not eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Act in view of provisions of Section 13(1

M/S. ISLAMIC ACADEMY OF EDUCATION,MANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

13(1)(d). 8.1.10 The Finance Act 2023 has inserted clause (g) in Explanation to Section 12AB(4) to provide that giving incomplete, false, or inaccurate information in a registration application under Section 12A(1)(ac) will be deemed as a "specified violation" that can lead to the cancellation of registration. 8.2 Thus, it means that the following registration could

M/S RABIYA BASARI BRAHAMATH-ULLAH ALLAYHA CHARITABLE TRUST vs. CIT,

In the result, the assessee's appeals are allowed

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

charitable and religious trust only for the purposes of a particular community and therefore, not eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Act in view of provisions of Section 13(1

SRI. MARAMMA TEMPLE SEVA TRUST,BANGALORE vs. CIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri. Abraham P. Georgei.T.A No818/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : Na) Sri Maramma Temple Seva Trust, No.11, Maramma Temple Street, 1St Main Road, Vyalikaval, Bengaluru 560 003 .. Appellant Pan : Aants4131R V. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (E), Bengaluru .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri. Sudhakar Rao, Cit – Dr-I Heard On : 21.10.2015 Pronounced On : 30.10.2015 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

charitable purpose it is difficult to accept the said contention mainly because it is nowhere provided in the section that in each case the authority shall find out the predominant purpose of the trust. Further, as stated earlier, in the three different clauses, namely, (a), (b) and (c) of sub-s. (1) of s. 13

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

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

13. We may also at this stage mention that the Kerala High Court in H.H. Marthanda Varma Elayaraja of Travancore Trust's case (supra ), the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Mohanlal Hargovinddas Public 11 ITA Nos.1265 & 1266 /Bang/2024 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13 Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust Charitable Trust's case (supra), the Bombay High Court in Trustees of Bhat

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

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

13. We may also at this stage mention that the Kerala High Court in H.H. Marthanda Varma Elayaraja of Travancore Trust's case (supra ), the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Mohanlal Hargovinddas Public 11 ITA Nos.1265 & 1266 /Bang/2024 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13 Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust Charitable Trust's case (supra), the Bombay High Court in Trustees of Bhat

SHRI SHRUTHIPARAMPARA GURUKULAM,BANGALORE vs. ITO, WARD-3, EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee-trust are allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

13(1)(a) bars exemption to any private religious trust, which does not enure for the benefit of the public. Section 80G(5)(iii) makes a distinction in cases of institutions or funds, which are for the benefit of any ITA Nos.1082, 1083/Bang/2022 Page 15 of 23 particular religious community or caste - say for Hindus, Muslims, Christians or for Brahmins

SHRI SHRUTHIPARAMPARA GURUKULAM,BANGALORE vs. ITO, WARD-3, EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee-trust are allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

13(1)(a) bars exemption to any private religious trust, which does not enure for the benefit of the public. Section 80G(5)(iii) makes a distinction in cases of institutions or funds, which are for the benefit of any ITA Nos.1082, 1083/Bang/2022 Page 15 of 23 particular religious community or caste - say for Hindus, Muslims, Christians or for Brahmins

SRI CHANNAMALLIKARJUNA TRUST COMMITTEE,KOPPAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Sri Channamallikarjuna Trust Cit (Exemption), Vs. Committee Gangavathi Bengaluru. Sri Mallikarjuna Mutta – Gangavathi, District Koppal – 583 227. Pan : Aajts 7938 J Appellant Respondent

13(1)(b) of the Act. In that view of the matter, the Court held that the respondent-trust is a charitable and religious trust which does not benefit any specific religious community and therefore, it cannot be held that Section

M/S NAVODAYA GRAMA VIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1 , MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

1,50,00,000 Charitable Trust 2. 10.06.2008 M.N. Rajendra Kumar Payment Rs.1,00,00,000 3. 10.11.2008 Navodaya Grama Vikas Receipt Rs. 50,00,000 Charitable Trust 4. 10.11.2008 M.N. Rajendra Kumar Payment Rs. 50,00,000 5. 24.11.2008 Navodaya Grama Vikas Receipt Rs. 50,00,000 Charitable Trust 6. 24.11.2008 M.N. Rajendra Kumar Payment

M/S.NAVODAYA GRAMA VIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1 , , MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

1,50,00,000 Charitable Trust 2. 10.06.2008 M.N. Rajendra Kumar Payment Rs.1,00,00,000 3. 10.11.2008 Navodaya Grama Vikas Receipt Rs. 50,00,000 Charitable Trust 4. 10.11.2008 M.N. Rajendra Kumar Payment Rs. 50,00,000 5. 24.11.2008 Navodaya Grama Vikas Receipt Rs. 50,00,000 Charitable Trust 6. 24.11.2008 M.N. Rajendra Kumar Payment

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and all the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan, Vice Presidnet & Shri B.R Baskaran

Charitable Trust, of Income-tax, No.619/G, 2ndBlock,. /Bang/2018) Central Circle 36th Cross, -2(1) Rajajinagar, 2nd Block, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 010 13 CO No. 89 2009- “ “ /Bang/2018 10 (In ITA No.1143 /Bang/2018) 14 CO No. 90 2014- “ “ /Bang/2018 15 (In ITA No.1148 /Bang/2018) Appellant by : Shri Prashanth G.S, C.A Respondent by : Shri Pramod Kumar Singh, CIT (DR) Date of hearing

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

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU vs. M/S. BLUELINE FOODS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, MANGALURU

Charitable Trust, Mansukhbhai\nK. Shah, with the direction to find valuable articles or things in Indian\nOverseas Bank at different branches. In the said warrant of\nauthorization also, the authorized Officer was directed to enter and\nsearch the building, etc. persons and to seize books of accounts,\ndocuments, money, bullion, jewellery, etc. as are provided under\nsection

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S B S & G FOUNDATION,, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for asst

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazthe Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemptions), Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S B S & G Foundation, 502, 2Nd Floor, 5Th ‘C’ Main, 5Th Cross, 2Nd Block, Hrbr Layout, Kalyannagar, Bangalore. . Respondent Pan – Aaatb6131D. Appellant By : Smt. Padmameenakshhi, Jcit Respondent By : Shri R.T Balasubramanyam, C.A Date Of Hearing : 28-9-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 4-10-2017 O R D E R

13 of the I.T. Act. (iv). Though the Finance Act, 2014 has amended the Income Tax Act, 1961 with regard to non-allowance of depreciation to charitable/ religious trust or institution on the value of assets which has already been allowed ITA No.884/B/16 7 as application of income u/s 11(1) by inserting sub- section

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

1) of the Act had been extended for audit cases till 17.10.2016 and there is no dispute that the assessee has filed the return of income Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust, Bangalore Page 13 of 25 belatedly u/s 139(4) of the Act on 18.1.2018, which is much beyond the due date of filing return as prescribed. Further, the assessee

SHROUTA VIJNAM GURUKULAM,MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, EXEMPTIONS, MANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee-trust are allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : Na M/S. Shrouta Vijnan Gurukulam, Vs. Ito (Exemptions), 1 Nidagod, Targod B. O. Ward – 1, Arasapur, Mangaluru. Uttara Kannada – 561 402. Pan : Aants 0655 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prakash S Hegde, Ca Revenue By : Shri. D. K. Mishra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 20.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.05.2024 O R D E R Per George George K: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Cit(E)’S Order Dated 22.02.2024 Rejecting The Assessee’S Application Seeking Approval Under Section 80G Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’).

13(1)(a) bars exemption to any private religious trust, which does not enure for the benefit of the public. Section 80G(5)(iii) makes a distinction in cases of institutions or funds, which are for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste - say for Hindus, Muslims, Christians or for Brahmins, etc. Donors to such trusts are debarred