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’).

2 of the Page 5 of 22 Trust Deed at Page 3 of the Paper Book]. From the objects of the Trust, it is very clear that the Trust has been formed for teaching, propagating and spreading of knowledge of vedic education. The Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sri Ashvalayana Vrunda Vs. ITO and Shrthiparampara Gurukulam

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

iv) the institution or fund maintains regular accounts of its receipts and expenditure; (v) the institution or fund is either constituted as a public charitable trust or is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860), or under any law corresponding to that Act in force in any part of India or under section 253 of the Companies

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

iv) the institution or fund maintains regular accounts of its receipts and expenditure; (v) the institution or fund is either constituted as a public charitable trust or is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860), or under any law corresponding to that Act in force in any part of India or under section 253 of the Companies

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

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

80G(5)(vi) of the Act, by the DIT(Exemption), Bangalore vide order dated 26.11.2009. The assessee filed its return of income for assessment 2 ITA Nos.1265 & 1266/Bang/2024 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13 Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust year 2012-13 on 21.03.2013 declaring income of rupees Nil. The return was processed by Revenue under Section 143(1) on 31.03.2013.The case

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

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

80G(5)(vi) of the Act, by the DIT(Exemption), Bangalore vide order dated 26.11.2009. The assessee filed its return of income for assessment 2 ITA Nos.1265 & 1266/Bang/2024 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13 Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust year 2012-13 on 21.03.2013 declaring income of rupees Nil. The return was processed by Revenue under Section 143(1) on 31.03.2013.The case

SANGHAMITRA RURAL FINANCIAL SERVICES,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

iv. The learned Assessing Officer has merely relied upon the figures as appearing in the financials, has arrived at the conclusion that the assessee was not carrying on charitable activity, without appreciating the nature of the work carried on, by the assessee. v. He submitted that the nature of charitable activity cannot be construed by a mere glance

SANGHAMITRA RURAL FINANCIAL SERVICES,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

iv. The learned Assessing Officer has merely relied upon the figures as appearing in the financials, has arrived at the conclusion that the assessee was not carrying on charitable activity, without appreciating the nature of the work carried on, by the assessee. V. He submitted that the nature of charitable activity cannot be construed by a mere glance

ANUGRAHA EDUCATION TRUST,SULLIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G from 31.12.2021 to assessment year 2024-25 in Form No.10AC by the ld. PCIT/CIT. The assessee trust thereafter applied for permanent registration/ approval as per clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act in Form No.10AB on 29.6.2024 vide Ack.no

M/S. NAVODAYA GRAMA VIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST,MANGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Navodaya Grama Vikas Charitable Trust, The Deputy #14-7-1005, Scdcc Commissioner Of Bank Ltd., Income Tax, Head Office Building, Central Circle – 1, Kodialbail, Vs. Mangaluru. Mangaluru – 575 003. Pan: Aaatn7594E Appellant Respondent : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate & Assessee By Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Ca Revenue By : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07-07-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-08-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.03.2022 Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-2, Panaji For A.Y. 2017-18 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Orders Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law. Equity, Weight Of Evidence. Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Learned Cit [A] Is Not Justified In Upholding The Disallowance Of The Exemption Claimed U/S.11 Of The Act

2(15). 29. In the present facts of the case, it seen that the assessee procures loans from SCDCC Bank and lend it to needy members of the SHG’s. These loans are being procured on interest by the assessee and, the assessee was charging interest on these amounts lent to the beneficiaries. The assessee claimed that this activity

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

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

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

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

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

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

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

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

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

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

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

Charitable Trust and the reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment, other statutory notices and the assessment is concluded in the case of the appellant is framed in the name of "M/s. Bhandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust" consequently the entire proceedings become void ab into. The reasons recorded for re-opening of assessment iv. amount to reason to suspect

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

80G of the Act and authorities below failed to appreciate that appellant is an authority setup by the Government of Karnataka and incurring such expenditure under directions from Governme authorities and all such payments are liable to be treated as expenses the payment of such donations are not beyond the scope of the objects QC-the appellant. 23. The learned

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

80G of the Act and authorities below failed to appreciate that appellant is an authority setup by the Government of Karnataka and incurring such expenditure under directions from Governme authorities and all such payments are liable to be treated as expenses the payment of such donations are not beyond the scope of the objects QC-the appellant. 23. The learned

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

charitable trust with objectives like education, health and welfare & therefore the ld. CIT(E) grossly erred in rejecting the approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act. 10. Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied on the order of ld. CIT(Exemption). 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is an undisputed fact