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

charitable and activities are carried out as per objects of the trust, there cannot be any reason for the cancellation of the registration because section 13(1) of the Act applies to it. To support his contention, he relied upon the decision of Krupanidhi Educational Trust v. DIT [2012] 27 taxmann.com 11 [Bang], Cancer Aid & Research Foundation

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

57,98,86,745.00 only. 8. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A)/NFAC. After considering the facts in entirety, the learned CIT(A)/NFAC allowed the appeal, holding that the entire benefit under Section 11 of the Act cannot be withdrawn solely on the grounds of a violation of Section

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

57,98,86,745.00 only. 8. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A)/NFAC. After considering the facts in entirety, the learned CIT(A)/NFAC allowed the appeal, holding that the entire benefit under Section 11 of the Act cannot be withdrawn solely on the grounds of a violation of Section

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

section 11(1)(d) and 15% of income set apart in earlier assessment year cannot be construed as income of the current year and 15% set apart out of the current year income is also excluded from income available for application. As such, the concept of application is only to show that the income is fully utilized rather than claiming

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

Trust situated at Gulbarga, Karnataka carrying on public charitable educational activities since 25.4.2016. The assessee has applied for registration u/s 12AA of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] for the first time on 31.3.2021 by online. The CPC has given the registration u/s 12AB of the Act to the assessee on 27.5.2021 w.e.f

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

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

section 11(1)(a)of\nthe Act. He drew our attention to the judgment and order of Hon'ble Supreme Court\nin the case of CIT vs. Programme for Community Organization ((2001) 248 ITR\n1(SC)) in Civil Appeal No.2658/1998,and submitted that the assessee is entitled for\ndeduction undersection 11(1)(a) of the Act to the tune

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

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

section 11(1)(a)of\nthe Act. He drew our attention to the judgment and order of Hon'ble Supreme Court\nin the case of CIT vs. Programme for Community Organization ((2001) 248 ITR\n1(SC)) in Civil Appeal No.2658/1998,and submitted that the assessee is entitled for\ndeduction undersection 11(1)(a) of the Act to the tune

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. SRI V C CHARANTIMATH , BAGALKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Trust Act, 1950. The assessee is also 'registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] w.e.f 01.04.1992 vide Registration No.A11548/CIT — II dated 20.11.1992. The assessee is recognized under section 80G of the Act on 24.02.2012. Assessee is notified under section 35AC of the Act vide notification no. F.No.NC- 270/371/2008 dated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA , BAGALKOTE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Trust Act, 1950. The assessee is also 'registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] w.e.f 01.04.1992 vide Registration No.A11548/CIT — II dated 20.11.1992. The assessee is recognized under section 80G of the Act on 24.02.2012. Assessee is notified under section 35AC of the Act vide notification no. F.No.NC- 270/371/2008 dated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. SRI.V.C.CHARANTIMATH , BAGALKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Trust Act, 1950. The assessee is also 'registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] w.e.f 01.04.1992 vide Registration No.A11548/CIT — II dated 20.11.1992. The assessee is recognized under section 80G of the Act on 24.02.2012. Assessee is notified under section 35AC of the Act vide notification no. F.No.NC- 270/371/2008 dated

SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SAGHA,BAGALKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Trust Act, 1950. The assessee is also 'registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] w.e.f 01.04.1992 vide Registration No.A11548/CIT — II dated 20.11.1992. The assessee is recognized under section 80G of the Act on 24.02.2012. Assessee is notified under section 35AC of the Act vide notification no. F.No.NC- 270/371/2008 dated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU vs. M/S. SRI. BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA, BAGALKOTE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Trust Act, 1950. The assessee is also 'registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] w.e.f 01.04.1992 vide Registration No.A11548/CIT — II dated 20.11.1992. The assessee is recognized under section 80G of the Act on 24.02.2012. Assessee is notified under section 35AC of the Act vide notification no. F.No.NC- 270/371/2008 dated

SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERSHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA,BAGALKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Trust Act, 1950. The assessee is also 'registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] w.e.f 01.04.1992 vide Registration No.A11548/CIT — II dated 20.11.1992. The assessee is recognized under section 80G of the Act on 24.02.2012. Assessee is notified under section 35AC of the Act vide notification no. F.No.NC- 270/371/2008 dated

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA , BAGALKOTE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Trust Act, 1950. The assessee is also 'registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] w.e.f 01.04.1992 vide Registration No.A11548/CIT — II dated 20.11.1992. The assessee is recognized under section 80G of the Act on 24.02.2012. Assessee is notified under section 35AC of the Act vide notification no. F.No.NC- 270/371/2008 dated

SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA,BAGALKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), , BENGALURU

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Trust Act, 1950. The assessee is also 'registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] w.e.f 01.04.1992 vide Registration No.A11548/CIT — II dated 20.11.1992. The assessee is recognized under section 80G of the Act on 24.02.2012. Assessee is notified under section 35AC of the Act vide notification no. F.No.NC- 270/371/2008 dated

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S SRI BASAVESHWAR VEERASHAIVA VIDYAVARDHAK SANGHA , BAGALKOTE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

Trust Act, 1950. The assessee is also 'registered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] w.e.f 01.04.1992 vide Registration No.A11548/CIT — II dated 20.11.1992. The assessee is recognized under section 80G of the Act on 24.02.2012. Assessee is notified under section 35AC of the Act vide notification no. F.No.NC- 270/371/2008 dated

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

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue and all the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan, Vice Presidnet & Shri B.R Baskaran

trust and its activities in relation to the charitable objects. 7.13 There appears to be no second opinion on this finding because the scope of Sections 11, 12 and 13, as we ITA Nos.709 to 712 /Bang/2018 ITA Nos.1142 to 1148 /Bang/2018 CO Nos.88 to 89 /Bang/2018 Page 56 of 73 find is in relation to application of income

AL-BADAR EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,KALABURAGI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELLARY

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are allowed and the\nappeal of the assessee is dismissed

Section 11 of the Act is\nthat the usage of the phrase „wholly' relates to the purposes and\nnot to the property of the trust. The word „wholly' is strikingly\ndifferent from the word „mainly'. Rather, the former should be\nunderstood to be closely akin to the phrase „solely'. Put\notherwise, there is no scope for the purposes being partially