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

36,65,35,\nto the Vendor. For the said purchase, the Trust had given advance to the Trustee without\nboard resolution, which is against the objectives of the Trust.\n3.13 Subsequently, RECT wrote-off, the advance of Rs 45,40,68,935/-in its books and made t\nentries clamming that land bearing Sy. No. 116 and 27 were

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

36,65,35,\nto the Vendor. For the said purchase, the Trust had given advance to the Trustee without\nboard resolution, which is against the objectives of the Trust.\n3.13 Subsequently, RECT wrote-off, the advance of Rs 45,40,68,935/-in its books and made t\nentries clamming that land bearing Sy. No. 116 and 27 were

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,14,301/-, the same was treated by the AO as\ngeneral donation denying exemption under section 11(1)(d) of the Act. The ld.\nAssessing Officer further observed that the assessee has claimed a sum of\nRs.12,00,191/- as Corpus fund donation received under Chinmaya Institute of\nNursing and others. The assessee could not furnish the donation letter

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 12AA(4) is intended to target misuse of charitable status—not procedural lapses. If the activities of the Trust are charitable in nature, then mere technical lapses in bookkeeping do not justify cancellation. We find that when the assessee is filing ROI along with audit report the observation of the ld PCIT that assessee does not maintain regular books

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

36,65,35,\nto the Vendor. For the said purchase, the Trust had given advance to the Trustee without\nboard resolution, which is against the objectives of the Trust.\n3.13 Subsequently, RECT wrote-off, the advance of Rs 45,40,68,935/-in its books and made t\nentries clamming that land bearing Sy. No. 116 and 27 were

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

charitable or religious purposes or in part only for such purposes, or of income being voluntary contributions referred to in sub- clause (iia) of clause (24) of section 2, shall, if the total income in respect of which he is assessable as a representative assessee (the total income for this purpose being computed under this Act without giving effect

SHRI HINGULAMBIKA EDUCATION SOCIETY,GULBARGA vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, KALBURGI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2020-21

charitable organizations. Due to absence of registration, tax liability gets attached even though they may otherwise be eligible for exemption and fulfil the other substantive conditions. The power of condonation of delay is not available under the section. In order to provide relief to such Trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, it is proposed to amend Section

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

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

charitable or religious purposes to the extent it does not exceed 15% of income derived from property & balance of Chitradurga Zilla Reddy Jana Sangha (R), Chitradurga Page 5 of 13 Rs.50,23,822/- towards set off the brought forward expenditure/application over income/Receipts with the current year’s income as per the provision contained in section 11(1

M/S. UNITED SPIRITS LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.United Spirits Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of Ub Towers, Income-Tax, Circle 7(1)(1) V. No.24 Vittal Mallya Road Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aaccm8043J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022 Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 12.10.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2013-2014. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Manufacture & Sale Of Alcoholic Beverage. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 On 28.11.2013 Which Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment. During The Course Of Assessment, The Assessee’S Case Was Also Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo). The Tpo Vide Order Dated 26.10.2016, Recommended Transfer Pricing Adjustments. The A.O., Thereafter, Passed A Draft Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2016. 2 It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 M/S.United Spirits Limited.

Charitable Trust (for short the "trust"). The assessee, 46 IT(TP)A No.2701/Bang/2017 M/s.United Spirits Limited. as per the MOU, had acquired a right to use the court yard for their business of hotel, being run in the palace, more efficiently and profitably. The question is whether the expenditure of Rs.10 lakh resulted in any addition to the fixed capital

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

36,21,781 expended by the assessee qualifies as an application of income for charitable purposes under section 11(1)(a) of the Act. At this juncture, it is pertinent to refer to the provisions of Section 11(1)(a) of the Act, which states that: (a) income derived from property held under trust

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

36,21,781 expended by the assessee qualifies as an application of income for charitable purposes under section 11(1)(a) of the Act. At this juncture, it is pertinent to refer to the provisions of Section 11(1)(a) of the Act, which states that: (a) income derived from property held under trust

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

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

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

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

charitable, but commercial. Depreciation was also denied on the same reasoning as held u/s. 11(1)(a). iii. Expenditure in the nature of Capital Expenditure – Rs.8,21,61,215. ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 9 of 183 iv. Disallowance of donations u/s 37 – Rs.63,25,000. v. Undisclosed cash receipts – Rs.87,72,00,000 : In this year also, as held

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

charitable, but commercial. Depreciation was also denied on the same reasoning as held u/s. 11(1)(a). iii. Expenditure in the nature of Capital Expenditure – Rs.8,21,61,215. ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 9 of 183 iv. Disallowance of donations u/s 37 – Rs.63,25,000. v. Undisclosed cash receipts – Rs.87,72,00,000 : In this year also, as held

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

charitable, but commercial. Depreciation was also denied on the same reasoning as held u/s. 11(1)(a). iii. Expenditure in the nature of Capital Expenditure – Rs.8,21,61,215. ITA Nos.500 TO 506/Bang/2020 Page 9 of 183 iv. Disallowance of donations u/s 37 – Rs.63,25,000. v. Undisclosed cash receipts – Rs.87,72,00,000 : In this year also, as held