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

5 of section 12AB of the Act is reproduced below\n[(4) Where registration or provisional registration of a trust or an institution has been\ngranted under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) of\nsub-section (1) of section 12AA, as the case may be, and subsequently,-\n(a) the Principal

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

5 of section 12AB of the Act is reproduced below\n[(4) Where registration or provisional registration of a trust or an institution has been\ngranted under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) of\nsub-section (1) of section 12AA, as the case may be, and subsequently,-\n(a) the Principal

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:

5)). Secondly, any income of a trust for charitable institution is created or established after the commencement of IT Act (sic). In each case the authority is required to find out whether the trust for charitable purposes is ITA.818/Bang/2015 Page - 21 established for the benefit of a particular religious community or caste. If it is so established, then the provisions

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’).

5. From the objects of the trust, activities and financials submitted by the assessee, it is observed that the trust is carrying on religious activities. Approval u/s.80G requires that the assessee should establish that it is for charitable purpose. Explanation 3 to section

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

charitable objects of the Trust. 9. The approval by the PCIT under section 80G requires fulfilment of all the conditions laid down in clauses (i) to (v) of section 80G(5

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

charitable objects of the Trust. 9. The approval by the PCIT under section 80G requires fulfilment of all the conditions laid down in clauses (i) to (v) of section 80G(5

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

5)(iii), benefit of deduction under section 80G can be claimed. Thus, it could be said that a public religious trust, not meant for the benefit of a particular community, caste or section, will be entitled to claim exemption on its income in the same way as a public charitable

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

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 under Section 12A, as clarified in Explanation 2 to section 11(1) of the Act. Moreover, the assessee failed to provide any documentary evidence proving that the amounts were spent for charitable purposes. The burden of proof lies with the assessee to demonstrate that the expenditure qualifies for exemption under section 11 of the Act. In the absence

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 under Section 12A, as clarified in Explanation 2 to section 11(1) of the Act. Moreover, the assessee failed to provide any documentary evidence proving that the amounts were spent for charitable purposes. The burden of proof lies with the assessee to demonstrate that the expenditure qualifies for exemption under section 11 of the Act. In the absence

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.

charitable in nature, coming under the provisions of Section 2(15) of the Act. The only objection of the ld. CIT for grant of Registration was that the objects of the Trust contained in Deed dt.4.6.2005 showed that the trust was set up for the benefit of a particular community. Whatever may be the correctness or otherwise of the said

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

5 of section 12AB of the Act is reproduced below\n[(4) Where registration or provisional registration of a trust or an institution has been q\nunder clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) of sub-secti\nof section 12AA, as the case may be, and subsequently, -\n(a) the Principal Commissioner

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

charitable in nature, coming under the provisions of Section 2(15) of the Act. The only objection of the ld. CIT for grant of Registration was that the objects of the Trust contained in Deed dated 15-12-2001 showed that the trust was set up for the benefit of a particular community. Whatever may be the correctness or otherwise

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.

Section 12A(a) of the Act. (b) The surplus generated, if it is held for charitable purpose and applied for charitable purpose by the assessee then, the Assessee has to be considered as existing for a charitable purpose. There are enough safeguards provided in Sec.12 and 13 of the Act to ensure that personal benefits of the persons in control

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

charitable or religious institution, any income thereof for any period during the previous year - (i) any funds of the trust or institution are invested or deposited after the 28th day of February. 1983 otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5

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

charitable or religious institution, any income thereof for any period during the previous year - (i) any funds of the trust or institution are invested or deposited after the 28th day of February. 1983 otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5

ACHARYA SRI TULSI MAHAPRAGYA SEVA KENDRA CHARITABLE TRUST ,BANGALORE vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for\nstatistical purposes

section 80G(5) are\nsatisfied in the instant case and the Appellant is registered as a public charitable trust\nwith

CITY HOSPITAL CHARITABLE TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: Na

Charitable Trust, Mangalore Page 4 of 10 proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G from 07.04.2022 to assessment year