M/S SHAHEED KARTAR SINGH SARABHA CHARITABLE TRUST (REGD.),LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, CHANDIGARH

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Charitable Trust Vs DCIT(E) 10. There are concurrent findings of the fact by three income-tax authorities and we do not find any reason to disagree with the conclusion arrived at by these authorities. 11. Under these circumstances, we hold that no fault can be found with the view taken by the Tribunal. Thus, the order of the Tribunal

DCIT, C-1 (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Charitable Trust in ITA No. 408/Asr/2012 vide order dated\n28/11/2014\n\"In the absence of anything on record that such cars were actually used by the\nChairman or trustees of the trust for their personal purpose, no addition on\naccount of use of car and its depreciation etc. can be made and it cannot be said\nITA No.52/CHD/2023

M/S SHAHEED KARTAR SINGH SARABHA CHARITABLE TRUST (REGD.),LUDHIANA vs. CIT(A)-4, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Charitable Trust and considering the fact that an appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh was already filed on 13.02.2019 (bearing No. 174/Chandi/2019) with respect to the quantum with respect to the said notice and was under the bonafide belief that no appeal is required to be filed against this order as an appeal

D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BANSAL CHARITABLE TRUST, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

Charitable Trust on which rent of Rs.12,35,271/- was paid. Copy of lease deed is submitted as Page No.102 to 105 of the paper-book. 3.7. The appellant further contended that the department should not have objected to the payment of lease rent to Smt. Suman Bansal which is quite reasonable and consistent with the past history

D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S OM PRAKASH BANSAL CHARITABLE TRUST, JAMMU

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are allowed

Charitable Trust on which rent of Rs.12,35,271/- was paid. Copy of lease deed is submitted as Page No.102 to 105 of the paper-book. 3.7. The appellant further contended that the department should not have objected to the payment of lease rent to Smt. Suman Bansal which is quite reasonable and consistent with the past history

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)

Charitable Institutions as well as the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of DIT(E) Vs. Sheth Mafatlal Gagal Bhai Foundation Trust does not support the case of the assessee as the facts are distinguishable. 7.4 It was accordingly submitted that in light of aforesaid submissions the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in sustaining the action

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)

Charitable Institutions as well as the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of DIT(E) Vs. Sheth Mafatlal Gagal Bhai Foundation Trust does not support the case of the assessee as the facts are distinguishable. 7.4 It was accordingly submitted that in light of aforesaid submissions the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in sustaining the action

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)

Charitable Institutions as well as the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of DIT(E) Vs. Sheth Mafatlal Gagal Bhai Foundation Trust does not support the case of the assessee as the facts are distinguishable. 7.4 It was accordingly submitted that in light of aforesaid submissions the Ld. CIT(A) was correct in sustaining the action

HARYANA STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Hayana State Agricultural Vs. The D.C.I.T., Marketing Board, Panchkula Circle, Panchkula. Panchkula. Pan: Aaalh0016R (Appellant) (Respondent)

trust u/s 11 of the Act, on account of non-application of its income upto the statutorily prescribed limit of 85% of the income as specified u/s 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). At the outset, it may be pointed out that this issue has come up before us in the second round

SH. ANIL TALWAR,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar

section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed on the basis of the DVO’s report because the said Report at best is only an opinion on estimate of investment. In support of the said proposition; CIT v. Prakash Industries Ltd. [ITA No. 6230/Del/2013 dated 19.02.2016]; DCIT v. Ghodawat Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. [ITA no. 1613/Bang/2014 dated 03.06.2016] were heavily relied upon

DCIT, C-1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. SHRI GURU GOBIND SINGH FOUNDATION, MOGA

In the result appeal of the Department as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargdci T, C-1 (E) Shri Guru Gobind Singh Foundation Circle- 1 (Exemption) 601/11, Tanki Wali Gali No. 2, Dashmesh Chandigarh Nagar Vs. Moga- Punjab Pan No. – Aadts0332A Appellant Respondent

Charitable Society. The above shows that the trustees & group societies have modus operandi to provide the loans to group concerns & invested the same in fixed assets. (iii) Reply of assessee that the sister trusts are not covered under 13(3) as specified persons, is not acceptable because there are common members, which are having interest in the all sister concerns

SMT. BALJEET KAUR SEKHON,MOHALI vs. DCIT, MOHALI

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

Charitable Trust, SCO 52-54, Circle 6(1), VS Sector 17-C, Chandigarh. Mohali. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ABXPS6329L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Kultej Singh Bains, Addl. CIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 10.07.2018 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख

M/S PUNJAB HERITAGE & TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are hereby

charitable trust / society on 18.12.2006. The Commissioner of income Tax-II issued a letter dated 22.6.2007 to the assessee stating therein as under:- “Subject : Application for registration u/s 12A(a)of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Regarding Please refer to your application for registration u/s 12A(a) of Income-tax Act, 1961 filed with office on 18.12.2006. A perusal

M/S PUNJAB HERITAGE & TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are hereby

charitable trust / society on 18.12.2006. The Commissioner of income Tax-II issued a letter dated 22.6.2007 to the assessee stating therein as under:- “Subject : Application for registration u/s 12A(a)of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Regarding Please refer to your application for registration u/s 12A(a) of Income-tax Act, 1961 filed with office on 18.12.2006. A perusal

M/S SHUBHAM COTTON MILLS PVT. LTD.,ELLENABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Charitable Trust 308 ITR 161 (SC) • S.N. Namasivayam Chettial Vs. CIT 38 ITR 579 (SC) • CIT Vs. Paradise Holidays 325 ITR 13 (Del) • CIT Vs. M/s Rice India Exports Pvt. Ltd. in ITA NO. 999/2010 dt. 03/08/2010 • CIT Vs. Smt. Poonam Rani 326 ITR 223 (Del) • CIT Vs. Jas Jack Elegance Exports 324 ITR 95 (Del) • ITO Vs. Somsons

SH. ARVAIL SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

271-276 of JPB). iii) ITA No. 1393/D/2017 Dated: 16.04.2021 Paramjeeet Singh Vs ACIT. (Page 277-280 of JPB). iv) ITA N. 5084/D/2019 Dated: 06.07.2022 Girish Kumar vs. ITO (Page 343-348 of JPB). v) ITA No. 1418/D/2023 Dated 21.09.2022 Kamla Devi vs. ITO (Page 349-355 of JPB). vi) ITA No. 1539/D/2020 Dated 17.03.2023 ITO vs. Hari Singh Saini

SH. PARAMJEET SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

271-276 of JPB). iii) ITA No. 1393/D/2017 Dated: 16.04.2021 Paramjeeet Singh Vs ACIT. (Page 277-280 of JPB). iv) ITA N. 5084/D/2019 Dated: 06.07.2022 Girish Kumar vs. ITO (Page 343-348 of JPB). v) ITA No. 1418/D/2023 Dated 21.09.2022 Kamla Devi vs. ITO (Page 349-355 of JPB). vi) ITA No. 1539/D/2020 Dated 17.03.2023 ITO vs. Hari Singh Saini

M/S GANESH DASS HUF,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

271-276 of JPB). iii) ITA No. 1393/D/2017 Dated: 16.04.2021 Paramjeeet Singh Vs ACIT. (Page 277-280 of JPB). iv) ITA N. 5084/D/2019 Dated: 06.07.2022 Girish Kumar vs. ITO (Page 343-348 of JPB). v) ITA No. 1418/D/2023 Dated 21.09.2022 Kamla Devi vs. ITO (Page 349-355 of JPB). vi) ITA No. 1539/D/2020 Dated 17.03.2023 ITO vs. Hari Singh Saini

SURJEET SINGH,SIRSA vs. PCIT, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

271-276 of JPB). iii) ITA No. 1393/D/2017 Dated: 16.04.2021 Paramjeeet Singh Vs ACIT. (Page 277-280 of JPB). iv) ITA N. 5084/D/2019 Dated: 06.07.2022 Girish Kumar vs. ITO (Page 343-348 of JPB). v) ITA No. 1418/D/2023 Dated 21.09.2022 Kamla Devi vs. ITO (Page 349-355 of JPB). vi) ITA No. 1539/D/2020 Dated 17.03.2023 ITO vs. Hari Singh Saini