M/S ARYANS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,MOHALI vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 821/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 M/S Aryans Educational & Vs. The Dcit, Circle-1 Charitable Trust, बनाम (Exemptions), # 2129, Phase-10, Chandigarh Mohali "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabta7550L

Charitable Trust, Mohali 6 1,63,73,648/- was received from the students of the assessee's institutions. The additions in corpus had been verified from these students u/s 133 (6) and 131 of the I.T. Act. 1961. During the verification, it was found that these corpus donations transactions were not genuine. Students name and address had been verified during

JT. CIT (OSD), (E), C-2, CHANDIGARH vs. CH. LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 717/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

Charitable Trust, Yamunanagar entry amounting to Rs.56,00.000/- which amount was deposited by the aforesaid person out of the proceeds of the flat at Mumhai. In fact we had submitted a copy of notice issued by ITO, Ward-3, Yamuna Nagar u/s 133(6) to the aforesaid person seeking information about the sale of flat at Mumbai; the proceeds

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable v. Union of India T20101 327 ITR 73 P&H-HC and St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) Vs. CIT (2013) 353 ITR 320 6. The above said view has further been approved by the Jurisdictional High Court i.e. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Managing Committee, Arya High School, in which, it has been

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable v. Union of India T20101 327 ITR 73 P&H-HC and St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) Vs. CIT (2013) 353 ITR 320 6. The above said view has further been approved by the Jurisdictional High Court i.e. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Managing Committee, Arya High School, in which, it has been

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable v. Union of India T20101 327 ITR 73 P&H-HC and St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) Vs. CIT (2013) 353 ITR 320 6. The above said view has further been approved by the Jurisdictional High Court i.e. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Managing Committee, Arya High School, in which, it has been

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable v. Union of India T20101 327 ITR 73 P&H-HC and St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) Vs. CIT (2013) 353 ITR 320 6. The above said view has further been approved by the Jurisdictional High Court i.e. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Managing Committee, Arya High School, in which, it has been

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable v. Union of India T20101 327 ITR 73 P&H-HC and St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) Vs. CIT (2013) 353 ITR 320 6. The above said view has further been approved by the Jurisdictional High Court i.e. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Managing Committee, Arya High School, in which, it has been

M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable v. Union of India T20101 327 ITR 73 P&H-HC and St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) Vs. CIT (2013) 353 ITR 320 6. The above said view has further been approved by the Jurisdictional High Court i.e. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Managing Committee, Arya High School, in which, it has been

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SCHOOL( MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY), CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable v. Union of India T20101 327 ITR 73 P&H-HC and St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) Vs. CIT (2013) 353 ITR 320 6. The above said view has further been approved by the Jurisdictional High Court i.e. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Managing Committee, Arya High School, in which, it has been

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable v. Union of India T20101 327 ITR 73 P&H-HC and St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) Vs. CIT (2013) 353 ITR 320 6. The above said view has further been approved by the Jurisdictional High Court i.e. Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Managing Committee, Arya High School, in which, it has been

J. K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

6. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that during the year under consideration, the assessee society has paid rent and security deposit to Lala Daswandi Ram Family Trust against lease of the land taken for construction of school building. It was submitted that Lala Daswandi Ram Family Trust was a private trust and being a sister concern

J.K.EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

6. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that during the year under consideration, the assessee society has paid rent and security deposit to Lala Daswandi Ram Family Trust against lease of the land taken for construction of school building. It was submitted that Lala Daswandi Ram Family Trust was a private trust and being a sister concern

J.K. EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JAMMU & KASHMIR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE-1,, CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

6. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that during the year under consideration, the assessee society has paid rent and security deposit to Lala Daswandi Ram Family Trust against lease of the land taken for construction of school building. It was submitted that Lala Daswandi Ram Family Trust was a private trust and being a sister concern

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

133(6) of the Act. It was observed that the AO had failed to make any enquiry to establish his suspicion that the purchases were bogus, whereas the assessee had produced on record documentary evidence to establish the genuineness of the purchase transactions; that the AO had brushed aside these evidences, which could not be accepted; that

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

133(6) of the Act. It was observed that the AO had failed to make any enquiry to establish his suspicion that the purchases were bogus, whereas the assessee had produced on record documentary evidence to establish the genuineness of the purchase transactions; that the AO had brushed aside these evidences, which could not be accepted; that

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

133(6) of the Act. It was observed that the AO had failed to make any enquiry to establish his suspicion that the purchases were bogus, whereas the assessee had produced on record documentary evidence to establish the genuineness of the purchase transactions; that the AO had brushed aside these evidences, which could not be accepted; that

THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, C-1, CHANDIGARH

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

charitable purposes of the trust. The assessee cannot be allowed deduction on account of application of funds on capital expenditure which have been spent out of the accumulated funds u/s 11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 during the earlier years. In view of the above, the disallowance made by the assessee is upheld. This ground of appeal