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

Charitable Trust by any\nregistered transfer/sale deed. Mr. P Shyamaraju in his sworn statement has\nconfirmed that the properties have been purchased in his name and in name of his\nson (Mr. Umesh S. Raju) in their individual capacities, by utilizing the funds given by\nthe Trust. Mr. P. Shyamaraju has admitted that the titles of said properties and legal

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

charitable trust fund for the purchase of property in the name of trustees of huge amount of approx. Rs.115 crores by the then trustees for purchase of property in their own name by utilising the fund of the trust. During the search statement of Mr. M. Vasu, who is the DGM (Finance) confirmed that the property was purchased

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

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 v.\nCIT (Exemptions) Lucknow 2016 (4) TMI 1119 - ITAT\nLucknow / [2016] 49 ITR (Trib) 276 wherein it was held that\neven when the assessee disputed the correctness of the\nstatement recorded u/s.132(4) and wanted to cross-examine,\nthe adjudicating authority did not grant this opportunity to\nthe assessee and held that testimony of witnesses

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 v.\nCIT (Exemptions) Lucknow 2016 (4) TMI 1119 - ITAT\nLucknow / [2016] 49 ITR (Trib) 276 wherein it was held that\neven when the assessee disputed the correctness of the\nstatement recorded u/s.132(4) and wanted to cross-examine,\nthe adjudicating authority did not grant this opportunity to\nthe assessee and held that testimony of witnesses

M/S. VINAYAKA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTIONS) WARD-2, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Vinayaka Educational Trust, The Income Tax #2/55, Outer Ring Road, Officer Opposite Lumbini (Exemptions), Gardens, Veerannapalya, Ward – 2, Nagavara, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 045. Pan: Aaatv6033C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Sunaina Bhatia, Ca : Shri Sankar Ganesh K, Revenue By Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 08-05-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 08-05-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 20.01.2023 Passed By Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2016-17. 2. At The Outset, The Ld.Ar Submitted That The Ld.Cit(A) Dismissed Appeal In Limine As There Was A Delay In Filing The Appeal By 386 Days. 3. The Ld.Ar Submitted Before The Ld.Cit(A) As Under: “2.1 The Appellant Has Filed The Following Facts Of The Case :

Charitable Trust engaged in providing education having PAN AAA TV6033C at No. 2/55/1, MRG House, Outer Ring Road, Opposite Lumbini Garden, Veerannapalya, Bangalore - 560045. 2. For the assessment year 2016-17, based on the audited statement of accounts, the appellant has computed its total income as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and has filed its return

M/S. UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

reassessment proceedings are not pressed. Accordingly, ground nos. 1 to 5 stands dismissed. 7. In respect of Ground nos. 6 to 11 pertaining to disallowance of payment made towards TV airing expenses, TV production expenses by holding that these expenses are in violation of law and public policy. At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that this issue stands covered

M/S. UNITED BREWERIES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Charitable Trust (for short the \"trust\"). The assessee, as per the MOU, had acquired a right to use the court yard for their business of hotel, being run in the palace, more efficiently and profitably. The question is whether the expenditure of Rs.10 lakh resulted in any addition to the fixed capital of the assessee. According to the Revenue

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

charitable or religious purposes or in part only for such purposes, or of income being voluntary contributions referred to in sub- clause (iia) of clause (24) of section 2, shall, if the total income in respect of which he is assessable as a representative assessee (the total income for this purpose being computed under this Act without giving effect

NVIDIA GRAPHICS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee s party allowed

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathi. Sr Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Nvidia Graphics Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, Mahadevpura Village, Central Circle – 2(4), K. R. Puram Hobli, Marathalli Bangalore. Bagmane Goldstone Building, North Tower, Mahadevpura S.O, Bangalore – 560 048. Pan : Aabcn 9200 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2024

Charitable Trust v. Income-tax Officer: In this case, the Hon'bie High Court of Madras held that where assessment was sought to be reopened in case of assessee - Trust on ground that there was unaccounted investment and undisclosed income paid for acquiring land from trustees and Assessing Officer while making original assessment in case of assessee-Trust made

M/S. DR. M NAGARAJU & RENUKA NAGARAJU CHARITABLE TRUST (R),BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-2, , BANGALORE

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

Charitable Trust (R), (Exemptions), Vaderahalli Village, Harohalli Hobli, Ward 2, Kaggalahalli, Ramanagar, Bangalore. Kaggala Halli B.O. – 562 112. PAN : AAATM 8955C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CA Respondent by : Shri Srinath S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 07.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 21.05.2024 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member This appeal

M/S. SRI. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES(REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

charitable trust and of\nsection 13(1)(c) of the Act.\n22.1 The learned DR pointed out that section 13(1)(c) of the Act\nspecifically denies the benefit of section 11 of the Act, if any income or\nproperty of the trust is used for the personal benefit of trustees or other\nspecified persons. Since

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

charitable trust and of\nsection 13(1)(c) of the Act.\n22.1 The learned DR pointed out that section 13(1)(c) of the Act\nspecifically denies the benefit of section 11 of the Act, if any income or\nproperty of the trust is used for the personal benefit of trustees or other\nspecified persons. Since

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES, KOLAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

charitable trust and of\nsection 13(1)(c) of the Act.\n22.1 The learned DR pointed out that section 13(1)(c) of the Act\nspecifically denies the benefit of section 11 of the Act, if any income or\nproperty of the trust is used for the personal benefit of trustees or other\nspecified persons. Since

M/S. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,KOLAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

charitable trust and of\nsection 13(1)(c) of the Act.\n22.1 The learned DR pointed out that section 13(1)(c) of the Act\nspecifically denies the benefit of section 11 of the Act, if any income or\nproperty of the trust is used for the personal benefit of trustees or other\nspecified persons. Since

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU vs. SRI DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES, KOLAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

charitable trust and of\nsection 13(1)(c) of the Act.\n22.1 The learned DR pointed out that section 13(1)(c) of the Act\nspecifically denies the benefit of section 11 of the Act, if any income or\nproperty of the trust is used for the personal benefit of trustees or other\nspecified persons. Since

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU, BENGALURU vs. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES, KOLAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

charitable trust and of\nsection 13(1)(c) of the Act.\n22.1 The learned DR pointed out that section 13(1)(c) of the Act\nspecifically denies the benefit of section 11 of the Act, if any income or\nproperty of the trust is used for the personal benefit of trustees or other\nspecified persons. Since