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

invested in fixed deposits in a nationalized bank. The interest earned on such deposit must be paid to the student from whom the fees was collected in advance. In fact, the entire money was utilized by the persons interested in the society. Therefore, there is a clear case of misuse of funds of the institution, besides, collecting money over

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

invested in fixed deposits in a nationalized bank. The interest earned on such deposit must be paid to the student from whom the fees was collected in advance. In fact, the entire money was utilized by the persons interested in the society. Therefore, there is a clear case of misuse of funds of the institution, besides, collecting money over

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

invested in fixed deposits in a nationalized bank. The interest earned on such deposit must be paid to the student from whom the fees was collected in advance. In fact, the entire money was utilized by the persons interested in the society. Therefore, there is a clear case of misuse of funds of the institution, besides, collecting money over

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

invested in fixed deposits in a nationalized bank. The interest earned on such deposit must be paid to the student from whom the fees was collected in advance. In fact, the entire money was utilized by the persons interested in the society. Therefore, there is a clear case of misuse of funds of the institution, besides, collecting money over

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

invested in fixed deposits in a nationalized bank. The interest earned on such deposit must be paid to the student from whom the fees was collected in advance. In fact, the entire money was utilized by the persons interested in the society. Therefore, there is a clear case of misuse of funds of the institution, besides, collecting money over

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

invested in fixed deposits in a nationalized bank. The interest earned on such deposit must be paid to the student from whom the fees was collected in advance. In fact, the entire money was utilized by the persons interested in the society. Therefore, there is a clear case of misuse of funds of the institution, besides, collecting money over

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

invested in fixed deposits in a nationalized bank. The interest earned on such deposit must be paid to the student from whom the fees was collected in advance. In fact, the entire money was utilized by the persons interested in the society. Therefore, there is a clear case of misuse of funds of the institution, besides, collecting money over

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

unexplained. Accordingly, the AO has assessed the above said amount of Rs.58.02 crores in AY 2012-13 to 2014-15 as stated above. 39. The Ld CIT(A) noticed that the assessing officer has made the above said addition without making any enquiry. The observations made by Ld CIT(A) are extracted below:- “47. During the course of assessment proceedings

GOBINDRAM CHANDRAMANI VIVEK,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 1(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in the manner indicated in this order

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kochar

unexplained investment in the property. 10. The Appellant craves for leave to add, to delete from or amend the grounds of appeal.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed his return of income belatedly on 29th March, 2013 under section 139(4), declaring total income of Rs. 8,32,830/-. The return of income was selected

RAJIV VENKATPATHI GOWDA,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2015-16

Charitable Trust and therefore treated the said credits as unexplained investments u/s. 69 of the Act. Similarly, the AO had disallowed

M/S. TEACHERS ACADEMY EDUCATION TRUST,BANGALORE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year : N.A.

investment made in the trust, the assessee submitted that all funds are either from trustees or students and the authority does not even state or point out single instance of failure to explain the sources. This is also irrelevant consideration at the stage of grant of registration. (h) With regard to the allegation in the survey report that since

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.CHILDREN'S EDUCATION SOCIETY, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above and the appeal of the revenue for A

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

unexplained investment and added to the total income of the assessee u/s 69 of the IT Act. However, the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition made since the assessee has reflected the investment made in the Balance Sheet. I agree with the findings of the A.O. and the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this may be dismissed and order

M/S.CHILDREN'S EDUCATION SOCIETY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above and the appeal of the revenue for A

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

unexplained investment and added to the total income of the assessee u/s 69 of the IT Act. However, the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition made since the assessee has reflected the investment made in the Balance Sheet. I agree with the findings of the A.O. and the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this may be dismissed and order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE vs. M/S.CHILDREN'S EDUCATION SOCIETY, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated above and the appeal of the revenue for A

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

unexplained investment and added to the total income of the assessee u/s 69 of the IT Act. However, the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition made since the assessee has reflected the investment made in the Balance Sheet. I agree with the findings of the A.O. and the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this may be dismissed and order

SMT. BRIDGET ANTHONY(LEGAL HEIR OF LATE MR. ELEVATHINGAL JOSEPH ANTHONY),BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

Charitable Trust Vs CIT (Exemptions) 49 IR (Trib) 276 • Obulapuram Mining Company Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT 2016 (7) TMI 1435 8.6 He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bangalore Tribunal in Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust ITA Nos. 500 to 506/Bang/2020 for the above proposition. The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced below; “231. The AO failed

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 purpose. 3.12 The ld. CIT(A) observed that the inference that is evident from Circular No.11/2008 dated 19.12.2008 issued by CBDT as well as the aforesaid judgements is that third Proviso to Section 143(3) of the Act is applicable to institute which are covered under First Proviso to Section 2(15) of the Act. First Proviso to Section

M/S. SRI . ADICHUNCHANAGIRI SHILKSHANA TRUST,MANDYA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

In the result ITA no.1096/bang/2024 filed by assessee is partly\nallowed and ITA No

charitable trust\nregistered u/s.12A of the Act as per Certificate issued dated\n17.7.1974 and therefore assessee is availing exemption u/s.11 of the\nAct. The assessee is running several educational institutes .\n5. On 18.7.2013, search & seizure operation u/s.132 of the Act was\ncarried out on the assessee trust. Accordingly for the impugned\n assessment year, a notice u/s.153A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(4), BENGALURU vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI SHIKHANA TRUST, MANDYA

In the result ITA no.1096/bang/2024 filed by assessee is partly\nallowed and ITA No

charitable trust\nregistered u/s.12A of the Act as per Certificate issued dated\n17.7.1974 and therefore assessee is availing exemption u/s.11 of the\nAct. The assessee is running several educational institutes .\n5. On 18.7.2013, search & seizure operation u/s.132 of the Act was\ncarried out on the assessee trust. Accordingly for the impugned\n assessment year, a notice u/s.153A