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

1)(d). (iii) Statutory Provision :section 164(2) are also relevant, which are reproduced as follows: “164 Charge of tax where share of beneficiaries unknown. (2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S ICICI EMERGING SECTOR FUND,, BANGALORE

In the result, all the thirteen appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K.Garodia, Accounant Member

164(1) of the Act would not be attracted in the present case. We also find that the hon'ble Madras High Court in the cases of CIT v. P. Sekar Trust [2010] 321 ITR 305 (Mad.) and CIT v. Manilal Bapalal Family Benefit Trust [2010] 321 ITR 322 (Mad) has taken a view that identity by reference

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

Trust (60 taxrnamm.com 165). The relevant part of the order, is reproduced below: “14. We have considered hi submission. Section 11(1)(a) does not contain any words of limitation to the effect that the income should have been applied for charitable or religious purpose only in the year in which the income has arisen. The application for charitable purposes

CHITRADURGA ZILLA REDDY JANA SANGH(R),CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 EXEMPTION, HUBLI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18

Trust reported in [2015] 60 taxmann.com 165 (Bangalore - Trib.). The relevant paragraph is reproduced below for ease of reference & convenience- “14. We have considered his submission. Section 11(1)(a) does not contain any words of limitation to the effect that the income should have been applied for charitable or religious purpose only in the year in which the income

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

section 132A. 50.3 Applicability-These\namendments will take effect from the 1st day of June, 2007.\"\n\n6.2 From the perusal of the section 153D of the Act read with the CBDT\nCircular No. 3 of 2008, dated 12-3-2008, the legislative intent can be gathered\nso far as that the legislature in its highest wisdom made it compulsory

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

Trust reported in 303 ITR 360 wherein the Hon’ble Court held has that the balance in current account is also treated as investment as per section 11(5) of the Act to claim the deduction provided under section 11(2) of the Act. 19.1 The assessee in form 35 (statement of facts before the ld. CIT-A) also submitted

SRI SRINIVASA TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

Trust reported in 303 ITR 360 wherein the Hon’ble Court held has that the balance in current account is also treated as investment as per section 11(5) of the Act to claim the deduction provided under section 11(2) of the Act. 19.1 The assessee in form 35 (statement of facts before the ld. CIT-A) also submitted

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGALURU

Section\n153D. It is not an exercise dealing with a immaterial matter which\ncould be corrected by taking recourse to Section 292B of the Act.\n16. We are not inclined to interdict the order of the Tribunal.\n17. Accordingly, the appeal is closed.\n6.5 The above view taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1, MANGALURU vs. M/S. T.A. PAI MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE,, MANGALURU

In the result, Revenue's appeal for Assessment Year 2010-11 is dismissed

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazi.T. A. No.2688/Bang/2017 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. T. A. Pai Management Institute, Income-Tax (Exemptions), Post Box No.9, Circle–1, 80 Badagabettu, Manipal, Mangalore. Pan : Aaatt 2248 R Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Cit Assessee By : Shri. M. Sridhar Kamath, Ca Date Of Hearing : 29.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2019 O R D E R

Trust (60 taxmann.com 165). The relevant part of the order is reproduced below: “14. We have considered his submission. Section 11(1Xa) does not contain any words of limitation to the effect that the income should have been applied for charitable or religious purpose only in the year in which the income has arisen. The application for charitable purposes

DY.DIT, BANGALORE vs. MAHARANI LAKSHMI AMMANI COLLEGE TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, the revenue’s appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

section 11(1)(a) takes place in the year in which the income is adjusted to meet the expenses incurred for charitable or religious purposes. Hence, even if the expenses for such purposes have been incurred in the earlier years and the said expenses are adjusted against the income of a subsequent year, the income of such subsequent year

MYSORE MINERALS LIMITED (NOW KNOWN AS KARNATAKA STATE MINERALS CORPORATION LIMITED),BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

charitable institutions, social clubs or for charity did not stand to test of commercial expediency - Held, yes - Whether since assessee had not placed any other materials on record in support of their claim of expenditure over community development, so as to apply test of commercial expediency, expenses incurred by assessee for community development was not allowable under section 37(1

MYSORE MINERALS LIMITED (NOW KNOWN AS KARNATAKA STATE MINERALS CORPORATION LIMITED),BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 4(1)(2), BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

charitable institutions, social clubs or for charity did not stand to test of commercial expediency - Held, yes - Whether since assessee had not placed any other materials on record in support of their claim of expenditure over community development, so as to apply test of commercial expediency, expenses incurred by assessee for community development was not allowable under section 37(1

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S. THE NEW CAMBRIDGE EDUCATIONAL TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

section 11(1)(a) takes place in the year in which the income is adjusted to meet the expenses incurred for charitable or religious purposes. Hence, even if the expenses for such purposes have been incurred in the earlier years and the said expenses are adjusted against the income of a subsequent year, the income of such subsequent year

ITO, BANGALORE vs. SHARDDHA TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raoincome-Tax Officer (Exemptions), Ward-3, Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs. Shraddha Trust, No.37/10, Yellappa Chetty Layout, Ulsoor Road, Bengaluru-560042. … Respondent Pan: Aacts 7373J

Trust (60 taxmann.com 165). The relevant part of the order is reproduced below: “14. We have considered his submission. Section 11(1)(a) does not contain any words of limitation to the effect that the income should have been applied for charitable or religious purpose only in the year in which the income has arisen. The application for charitable purposes

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. TARALABALU BRUHANMATT, CHITRADURGA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2012-13

Trust (60 taxmann.com 165). The relevant part of the order is reproduced below: “14. We have considered his submission. Section 11(1)(a) does not contain any words of limitation to the effect that the income should have been applied for charitable or religious purpose only in the year in which the income has arisen. The application for charitable purposes

ACIT-(E), CIRCLE-1,, BANGALORE vs. M/S. BHAGWAN MAHAVEER MEMORIAL JAIN TRUST, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Laliet Kumarasst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (E), Circle-1, Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs. Bhagwan Mahaveer Memorial Jain Trust, No.17, Millers Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru-560 052. … Respondent Pan:Aaatb 0895 L

Trust (60 taxmann.com 165). The relevant part of the order is reproduced below: “14. We have considered his submission. Section 11(1)(a) does not contain any words of limitation to the effect that the income should have been applied for charitable or religious purpose only in the year in which the income has arisen. The application for charitable purposes

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S G M EDUCATION TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of revenue and C

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

Trust, while dealing with the issue of carry forward of excess expenditure over income has held that in para-14 as under; “14. We have considered his submission. Section 11(1)(a) does not contain any words of limitation to the effect that the income should have been applied for charitable or religious purpose only in the year in which

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.PANCHAJANYA VIDYA PEETA WELFARE TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

Section 11(1)(a) does not contain any words of limitation to the effect that the income should have been applied for charitable or religious purpose only in the year in which the income has arisen. The application for charitable purposes as contemplated insection 11(1)(a) takes place in the year in which the income is adjusted to meet

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.PANCHAJANYA VIDYA PEETA WELFARE TRUST, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

Section 11(1)(a) does not contain any words of limitation to the effect that the income should have been applied for charitable or religious purpose only in the year in which the income has arisen. The application for charitable purposes as contemplated insection 11(1)(a) takes place in the year in which the income is adjusted to meet