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

b)sub-clause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1), from the first of the assessment year for which it was provisionally registered: Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust, Bangalore Page 16 of 25 Provided further that where registration has been granted to the trust or institution under section 12AA or section 12AB ], then, the provisions of sections

M/S. ARHAM MITRA MANDAL,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS)-WARD-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

condone the delay.\n16. In rejoinder, the learned AR submitted the case laws relied on by learned\nStanding Counsel is distinguishable to facts of instant case. It was submitted that\nin the case of Novodaya Educational Society Vs. DCIT (supra), assessee in that\ncase has neither filed Form 10 electronically or manually before the passing of the\nintimation under section

MARINE DRISHTI AND COSTAL FOUNDATION ,GOA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. Now the brief facts of the case are that the assessee “Marine Drishti Coastal Foundation” was incorporated on 24/05/2022 under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 as a non-profit organization to promote commerce, arts, science, sports, education, research, charity, protection of the environment, promote diverse cultural and heritage

MARINE DRISHTI AND COASTAL FOUNDATION ,GOA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. Now the brief facts of the case are that the assessee “Marine Drishti Coastal Foundation” was incorporated on 24/05/2022 under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 as a non-profit organization to promote commerce, arts, science, sports, education, research, charity, protection of the environment, promote diverse cultural and heritage

MARINE DRISHTI AND COSTAL FOUNDATION ,GOA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. Now the brief facts of the case are that the assessee “Marine Drishti Coastal Foundation” was incorporated on 24/05/2022 under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 as a non-profit organization to promote commerce, arts, science, sports, education, research, charity, protection of the environment, promote diverse cultural and heritage

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-3, BANGALORE vs. SRI RAMAIAH REDDY EDUCATIONAL TRUST, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

12A(1)(b)", "154", "250", "139(1)", "12AA"], "issues": "Whether the exemption under Section 11 can be denied solely for belated filing of Form 10B, and whether the matter should be restored to CIT(A) pending the outcome of a delay condonation

INSTITUTE OF NEPHROUROLOGY,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE - 01, UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and restored to the file of the ld

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 234B of the Act amounting to Rs.41,68,052 under the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. 10. In view of the above and other grounds as may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal, the Appellant prays that

INSTITUTE OF NEPHROUROLOGY,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE 1, UNITY BUILDING

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and restored to the file of the ld

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 234B of the Act amounting to Rs.41,68,052 under the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. 10. In view of the above and other grounds as may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal, the Appellant prays that

M/S. H M V EDUCATIONAL CULTURAL & SOCIAL TRUST, ,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER[EXEMPTIONS], WARD-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri George George K., Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

condonation of delay u/s 119[2][b] for the delay in filing the Form No. 10B under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 5 Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT[A] is not justified in upholding the taxation of gross receipts of Rs. 10,22,94,076/-, without allowing the application/ expenses

UBMC TRUST ASSOCIATION,UDUPI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed on the legal issue raised in the additional ground

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

b. The authorities below have erred in arriving at a conclusion that the said receipt is not corpus by merely relying on the nomenclature on the receipt, without appreciating the nature of the transaction, on the facts and circumstances of the case. c. Without prejudice and not conceding that the receipt is a corpus receipt since the sum was received

UBMC TRUST ASSOCIATION,UDUPI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed on the legal issue raised in the additional ground

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

b. The authorities below have erred in arriving at a conclusion that the said receipt is not corpus by merely relying on the nomenclature on the receipt, without appreciating the nature of the transaction, on the facts and circumstances of the case. c. Without prejudice and not conceding that the receipt is a corpus receipt since the sum was received

ARYA VYSYA SANGHA,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HUBLI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 249(3) of the Act. The reasons for delay is also not reasonable cause for filing appeal late. Whenever intimation is generated it is ITA Nos.1269 & 1270/Bang/2024 Page 5 of 12 immediately sent to the assessee by email. If the assessee was not satisfied from the processing of return, either he may approach for rectification

ARYA VYSYA SANGHA,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HUBLI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

section 249(3) of the Act. The reasons for delay is also not reasonable cause for filing appeal late. Whenever intimation is generated it is ITA Nos.1269 & 1270/Bang/2024 Page 5 of 12 immediately sent to the assessee by email. If the assessee was not satisfied from the processing of return, either he may approach for rectification

M/S. SEVA BHARATHI SHIKSHANA SAMSTHE ,CHAMARAJANAGARA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, MYSORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2016-17

section 12A(1)(b) of the Act before the due date of filing the return of income. But the same was not uploaded electronically due to omission which is nothing but a clerical mistake. The ld. AR further contended that this Tribunal in the case of Gopala Gowda Shanthaveri Memorial Hospital Trust in ITA number 921/Bang/2024 has condoned the delay

LORD VENKATESHWARA LADIES EDUCATIONAL AND WELFARE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1 , BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Lord Venkateshwara Ladies Vs. Ito (Exemption), Educational & Welfare Trust, Ward –1, No.1696, Bengaluru. 5Th ‘A’ Cross, Banashankari 1St Stage, Bengaluru – 560 080. Pan : Aaatl 6403 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Ravishankar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. V. Parithivel, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.12.2023

1) of the Act, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] and the learned assessing officer failed to appreciate that the appellant being a trust registered under section 12A of the Act, is entitled for all the benefit as envisaged under the provisions of section

SRI SHARADA FOUNDATION TRUST,KOPPAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2024-25

b)(i)of the Act. The order as passed being bad in law and such order is liable to be quashed. 1.5 In any case the cancellation of provisional registration is bad in law and the provisional registration granted to the appellant is to be restored. 2. In any case, the learned CIT(Exemptions) has erred in not appreciating

SUVARNA AROGYA SURAKSHA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE - 1, BANGALORE, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17

1, Bangalore was dismissed. 2. Therefore assessee is aggrieved and in appeal before us. 3. It was found that assessee has filed appeal before the Tribunal which is late by 145 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay. According to the application, it is stated that assessee is a charitable trust registered u/s. 12A

APOLLO EDUCATION TRUST,BANGALORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

condoned the delay in filing the appeal and admitted the appeal and thereby ought to have adjudicated the grounds raised by the appellant in the interest of Justice and equity, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Without prejudice, the appellant denies itself liable to be taxed on the income of Rs.1,15,66,754/- as against

APOLLO EDUCATION TRUST,BANGALORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

condoned the delay in filing the appeal and admitted the appeal and thereby ought to have adjudicated the grounds raised by the appellant in the interest of Justice and equity, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Without prejudice, the appellant denies itself liable to be taxed on the income of Rs.1,15,66,754/- as against