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 11 or section 12 shall operate so as to exclude from the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt thereof - . Page 8 of 23 (d) in the case of a trust for chartable or religious purposes or a charitable

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

8 of 81\nITA Nos.2106 to 2109/Bang/2024\nwithout any serving of the objective of the Trust. From these entries, it is noticed that out of Rs\n17,65,44,614/-, Mr. Shyamaraju had given land advance of Rs 4,40,00,000/- against purchase of\nthe properties in his name. However neither Trust nor Trustees have not given any explanation

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

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 in nature and are being carried out its activities as per the object of the trust

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

section 80G which excludes any purpose ‘the whole or ITA Nos.1082, 1083/Bang/2022 Page 8 of 23 substantially the whole of which is a religious nature’ from charitable purpose is attracted. 11. He also relied on the decisions in Shiv Ratan Rathi Foundation v CIT [2012] 20 taxmann.com 221 (Jaipur) and Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd v CIT [1997] 93 Taxman

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

section 80G which excludes any purpose ‘the whole or ITA Nos.1082, 1083/Bang/2022 Page 8 of 23 substantially the whole of which is a religious nature’ from charitable purpose is attracted. 11. He also relied on the decisions in Shiv Ratan Rathi Foundation v CIT [2012] 20 taxmann.com 221 (Jaipur) and Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd v CIT [1997] 93 Taxman

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

8.\nITA Nos.2106 to 2109/Bang/2024\nPage 12 of 81\nRUKMINI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST\nDivyande Chambers. Wing.\nO Saragaaray Head\n한인 25\nLand Advanc\nGroup Bummary\n14-21151-28\nDelanc\n17,20,00,000.00 0\n3000,000. Dò De\n1,50,000 po b\n5,00,000.00 р\nOr P Shyamaraju -Land Advance-2\nERM Concurents\nKashna Roddy Land\nLand Advance

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.

trust deed are charitable in nature as contemplated under Section 2(15) of the Act and the objects of developing the Muslim community like object No.1, 2, 9, 11, 19, 20 & 21, which is a broad cross section of general public itself is an object of advancement of general public utility, which is a charitable object along with the other

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:

8 Association (supra) by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. As far as religious purpose is concerned means religious purpose within the meaning of personal law applicable to the assessee as held by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Bai Hirbai Rahim Aloo Paroo & Kesarbai Dharamsey Kakoo Charitable & Religious Trust

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, , BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals\nare allowed except the limitation ground

13(8) of the Act and treated the income under the\nhead “Profits and Gains of Business or Profession”. Thereafter the Ld.CIT(A)\nhad considered the other disallowances and granted partial relief.\n7. The assessee not satisfied with the orders of the Ld.CIT(A), is in\nappeals before this Tribunal.\n8. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals\nare allowed except the limitation ground

13(8) of the Act and treated the income under the\nhead “Profits and Gains of Business or Profession”. Thereafter the Ld.CIT(A)\nhad considered the other disallowances and granted partial relief.\n7. The assessee not satisfied with the orders of the Ld.CIT(A), is in\nappeals before this Tribunal.\n8. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that

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

8,14,16 & 17 of the Trust Deed dated 31-01-2013 are for a specific religious community and hence the trust gets hit by the mischief of the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act. 2.4 Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the CIT, Davangere dt.31.1.2013, the assessee preferred an appeal in ITA No.423/Bang/2013 raising the following

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 and 80(G) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as. amended from time to time. Further no amendment shall be carried out without the prior approval of the commissioner of Income Tax. d. The funds and the income of the trust shall be solely utilized for the achievement of its objectives and no portion thereof it shall be utilized

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

SRI ASHVALAYANA VRUNDA,BANGALORE vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

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

SRI ASHVALAYANA VRUNDA,BANGALORE vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

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

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

trust have been used for purchase of those\nlands and therefore there is a clear-cut violation of the provisions of\nsection 13 of the act. She extensively referred the orders of the learned\nprincipal Commissioner of income tax.\nClarification sought during hearing\n40. Subsequently we have put the case for the clarification before the\nparties and it was asked

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

8 1145/Bang/2018 2011- “ “ 12 9 1146/Bang/2018 2012- “ “ 13 10 1147/Bang/2018 2013- “ “ ITA Nos.1142 to 1148 /Bang/2018 CO Nos.88 to 89 /Bang/2018 Page 2 of 73 11 1148/Bang/2018 2014- “ “ 15 12 CO No. 88 2008- Sri Srinivasa The Dy. /Bang/2018 09 Educational & Commissioner (In ITA No.1142 Charitable Trust, of Income-tax, No.619/G, 2ndBlock,. /Bang/2018) Central Circle 36th Cross, -2(1) Rajajinagar

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU vs. K J FOUNDATION, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assistant Commissionerof K.J. Foundation Income Tax 58/1 Thubarahalli Room No. 606, 6Th Floor Behind Sriram, Samruthi Vs. Unity Bldg. Annex Apartments, Whitefield Road P. Kalinga Rao Road Karnataka 500067 Karnataka 560027 Pan – Aabtk1178N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satish R. Mody, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Vilas V. Shinde, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.06.2024 O R D E R Per: Soundararajan K., J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (‘Cit(A)’) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) In Respect Of The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1 The Order Of Learned Cit(A) Is Opposed To Facts & Circumstances Of The Case 2 The Cit(A) Has Erred In Observing That During The F.Y 2016- 17, The Assessee Had Paid Lease Rent Of Rs.9,58,28,710/-Only To Eduspark International Pvt. Ltd. Which Was A Specified Person U/S.13(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & That Such Payment

charitable purposes and subjected the entire income to tax. The said order was challenged before the CIT(A) on the ground that the application of provisions 13(2)(c) and 13(2)(g)) of the Act to deny the deduction is not correct since there is no payment of any remuneration to the trustee and further in respect

SANGHAMITRA RURAL FINANCIAL SERVICES,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

8. To borrow and raise money in such manner as the Company may think fit. 9. To invest the monies of the Company not immediately required for its purposes in or upon such investments/securities and in the modes specified under the provisions of Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 11(5) of the Income Tax Act. 1961 as amended