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

245 wherein the Tribunal has exclusively dealt with this issue in detail. Of course, this decision has not considered the amended provisions of section 56(2) of the Act which governs I.T.A. No.1464/Bang/2018 the taxing of certain gifts despite its capital nature. In the said order, the Tribunal considered various decisions viz., the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal

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 if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

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 if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

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 if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

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 if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

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 if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

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 if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

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 if it involves the carrying on of— (a) any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business; or (b) any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business;  for a cess or fee or any other consideration, irrespective of the nature of use or application, or retention of the income from such

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

Charitable Trust (199 ITR 819) and Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs. Muttaiah Chettiar Family Trust (245 ITR 400).” 4. A. Disallowance of Faculty Teaching Charges payable to Ohio University (for both A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2009-10). 4.1 In the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had claimed application

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S PEOPLE'S EDUCATATION SOCIETY, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri. A. K. Garodia & Shri. Lalit Kumari.T.A No.1074/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax (E), Circle -1, Bengaluru .. Appellant V. M/S. Peoples Education Society, 50 Feet Road, Hanumanthanagar, Bsk 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560 050 .. Respondent Pan : Aaatp3955H Assessee By : Shri. Prashanth, C, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Iii Heard On : 31.05.2017 Pronounced On : 09.06.2017 O R D E R Per Lalit Kumar:

charitable purposes / activities of the trust. It is also coming from the record that the assessee has applied the total amount of Rs.47,87,64,431/- for the trust purposes. The reasoning given by the AO is this that as the excess fund was already available with the assessee-trust which was lying in the form FDRs, that should have

M/S DAKSHINA KANNADA KOOTA BRAHMANARA MITRA MANDALI,BANGALORE vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav

Section ITA Nos.1483 & 1484/Bang/2013 Page 8 of 15 13(1)(b) which prohibits tax exemption to the charitable trust or institution created for the benefit of any religious community or caste. 10.4 It is therefore held that the assessee trust has not been created or established with an object of or for the charitable purpose of the 'relief

VIDYANIKETAN EDUCATION AND CULTURAL TRUST,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed, while the stay petition by the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P.George

245 ITR 400 (Mad) wherein following the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of DIT Vs. Singhania Charitable Trust 199 ITR 819 (Cal), it was held that the purpose of accumulation has to be mentioned specifically otherwise the accumulation claimed can be disallowed. 15. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) the Assessee

CENTRE FOR E-GOVERNANCE ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2021-22

Charitable Trust reported in 199 ITR 819 and Hon’ble Madras High Court in M.C. Muthiah . Page 7 of 30 Chettiar Family Trust reported in 245 ITR 400 to emphasise that the purpose of accumulation must be specific and cannot be general or routine. Since, the assessee failed to specify a clear purpose and merely stated broad objects

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. THE MYSORE EDUCATION SOCIETY, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

Section 11 to the extent of the excess accumulation of income in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) Vs. Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust (1993) 199 ITR 819 (Cal). The ld. DR has further contended that even the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(4), BENGALURU vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI SHIKHANA TRUST, MANDYA

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

charitable trust registered u/s.12A of the Act as per Certificate issued dated 17.7.1974 and therefore assessee is availing exemption u/s.11 of the Act. The assessee is running several educational institutes . 5. On 18.7.2013, search & seizure operation u/s.132 of the Act was carried out on the assessee trust. Accordingly for the impugned assessment year, a notice u/s.153A

M/S. SRI . ADICHUNCHANAGIRI SHILKSHANA TRUST,MANDYA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

charitable trust registered u/s.12A of the Act as per Certificate issued dated 17.7.1974 and therefore assessee is availing exemption u/s.11 of the Act. The assessee is running several educational institutes . 5. On 18.7.2013, search & seizure operation u/s.132 of the Act was carried out on the assessee trust. Accordingly for the impugned assessment year, a notice u/s.153A

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-1 , MANGALURU vs. M/S MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA , MANIPAL

In the result, the appeals of the revenue for AY 2008-09 and 2010-11 are partly allowed and the appeal relating to AY 2009-10 is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 11 only contemplates the application of income and if the said income is applied for the ITA No.160, 161 & 737 /Bang/2018 Page 6 of 10 aims and objectives of the trust, then the trust is entitled for exemption under the provision. The said analogy cannot be extended to acquisition of assets from the borrowed funds. If we hold

DY. DIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S RASHTROTHANA PARISHAT, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raodeputy Director Of Income-Tax (Exemption), Circle 17(2), Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S.Rashtrotthana Parishat, Keshavashilpa, Gavipuram Road, Kempegowda Nagar, Bangalore. … Respondent Pa No.Aaatp1699L

charitable societies with similar objects through the process of merger or amalgamation by merging societies with Rashtrotthana Parishat. (r) To undertake programmes and projects for advancing the economic, social and cultural interest of the Indian (Bharatiya) society at large and in particular the weaker sections of the society classified as schedule castes and schedule tribes. (s) To undertake projects