M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

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

2) act, 2019 there was an amendment to the above section wherein one more condition is included which provides that if the trust or institution has not complied with the requirement of any other law, order, directions decree then also such a registration can be cancelled. 31. The First Reason for cancellation is that the assessee trust has made amendment

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,BANGALORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS RANGE , BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 is allowed as indicated above and Revenue’s cross appeal is consequently dismissed

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumar

ab initio after having held that assessment in the status of AOP is not correct and the appellant is to be assessed as Artificial juridical person on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the order of the learned assessing officer is bad in law as the entire

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE- 1, BANGALORE vs. M/S BANGALORE DEVELOPEMNT AUTHORITY , BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 is allowed as indicated above and Revenue’s cross appeal is consequently dismissed

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumar

ab initio after having held that assessment in the status of AOP is not correct and the appellant is to be assessed as Artificial juridical person on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the order of the learned assessing officer is bad in law as the entire

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELLARI vs. M/S. NAVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST, RAICHUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2009-10

charitable or religious trust or institution that has been registered u/s 12A), Form 10BB (Audit report under section 10(23C) of the Act) and the Form 3CD. The afore-mentioned facts were also brought under the order of the CIT(A). The assessee is claiming exemptions available to both 10(23C)(vi) and 12A registered entities and moreover the assessee

M/S. SRINIVAS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE AND RESEARCH CENTRE,MANGALROE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: N.A.

ab-initio in as much as there is no violation of law or objects of the trust by the appellant and thus, the impugned order passed deserves to be quashed. The learned Pr.CIT, Bangalore ought to have appreciated 3. that none of the conditions mentioned in the un-numbered fifteenth proviso to section 10[23C] of the Act was attracted

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

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

CHARITABLE TRUST [2019] 109 TAXMANN.COM 258 / 267 TAXMAN 16 ( BOM) was upheld. Thus, he held that whole the trust cannot be held to be non-genuine, and the registration cannot be cancelled. 30. Thus, he submitted that the order passed by the learned CIT is not sustainable cancelling the registration granted to the assessee trust under section 12 AB

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

charitable trust fund for the purchase of property in the name of trustees of huge amount of approx. Rs.115 crores by the then trustees for purchase of property in their own name by utilising the fund of the trust. During the search statement of Mr. M. Vasu, who is the DGM (Finance) confirmed that the property was purchased

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

ab), the person in receipt of the income has made an application in the prescribed form and manner to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, for registration of the trust or institution,— (i)where the trust or institution is registered under section 12A [as it stood immediately before its amendment by the Finance (No. 2

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

35. The assessee prepares a budget for compensation payable for land acquisition and development expenditure thereon. Total pricing of land would primarily include cost of land acquisition and total development cost and 12.75% interest for one year along with Establishment & Board Service Charges towards maintenance of the Board. The computation of total cost of acquisition and development is tabulated below

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

35. The assessee prepares a budget for compensation payable for land acquisition and development expenditure thereon. Total pricing of land would primarily include cost of land acquisition and total development cost and 12.75% interest for one year along with Establishment & Board Service Charges towards maintenance of the Board. The computation of total cost of acquisition and development is tabulated below

SHRI SIWANCHI OSWAL JAIN BHAVAN TRUST,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

ab initio and is liable to be quashed. ITA No.2172 & 2173/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 10 2. In any case, and without prejudice the impugned order passed in violation of principles of natural justice is liable to be quashed. 3. The impugned order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) is not based on legal provisions but based

SHRI SIWANCHI OSWAL JAIN BHAVAN TRUST,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

ab initio and is liable to be quashed. ITA No.2172 & 2173/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 10 2. In any case, and without prejudice the impugned order passed in violation of principles of natural justice is liable to be quashed. 3. The impugned order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) is not based on legal provisions but based