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

CT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is Partly Allowed for\nStatistical Purposes as per the directions above

depreciation may kindly be deleted.\nGROUND:2\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble CIT(A)\nhas erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in denying\nbenefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act and assessing the trust as AOP and making\nan addition of Rs. Rs.10

JCIT(OSD), C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

Charitable or religious Trust etc. 17B. The report of the audit of the accounts of Trust or institution which is required to be furnished under clause (b) of Section 12A shall be in Form No. 10B. The assessee has furnished in the Income-tax Return in the ITR-7 on 15-10-2010. The assessee has not enclosed the audit

THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,PATIALA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

Charitable or religious Trust etc. 17B. The report of the audit of the accounts of Trust or institution which is required to be furnished under clause (b) of Section 12A shall be in Form No. 10B. The assessee has furnished in the Income-tax Return in the ITR-7 on 15-10-2010. The assessee has not enclosed the audit

BABA HIRA SINGH BHATTAL INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY,LEHRAGAGA vs. DCIT, (E), C-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

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

Charitable Trust”, 2012 (12) TMI 818 )copy at ACL PB-II, pages 57-59) and the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of “the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Sunbeam English School”, 2013 (7) TMI 812 (copy at ACL PB-II, pages 60-64). 10. The Department, on the other hand

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 Organisation, where the amount so paid is in excess of what may be reasonably paid for such services. Person defined above includes; (i) the author of the trust or the founder of the institution, (ii) any person who has made a substantial contribution to the trust or institution, [that is to say, any person whose total contribution during

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 Organisation, where the amount so paid is in excess of what may be reasonably paid for such services. Person defined above includes; (i) the author of the trust or the founder of the institution, (ii) any person who has made a substantial contribution to the trust or institution, [that is to say, any person whose total contribution during

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 Organisation, where the amount so paid is in excess of what may be reasonably paid for such services. Person defined above includes; (i) the author of the trust or the founder of the institution, (ii) any person who has made a substantial contribution to the trust or institution, [that is to say, any person whose total contribution during

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 Organisation, where the amount so paid is in excess of what may be reasonably paid for such services. Person defined above includes; (i) the author of the trust or the founder of the institution, (ii) any person who has made a substantial contribution to the trust or institution, [that is to say, any person whose total contribution during

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 Organisation, where the amount so paid is in excess of what may be reasonably paid for such services. Person defined above includes; (i) the author of the trust or the founder of the institution, (ii) any person who has made a substantial contribution to the trust or institution, [that is to say, any person whose total contribution during

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 Organisation, where the amount so paid is in excess of what may be reasonably paid for such services. Person defined above includes; (i) the author of the trust or the founder of the institution, (ii) any person who has made a substantial contribution to the trust or institution, [that is to say, any person whose total contribution during

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 Organisation, where the amount so paid is in excess of what may be reasonably paid for such services. Person defined above includes; (i) the author of the trust or the founder of the institution, (ii) any person who has made a substantial contribution to the trust or institution, [that is to say, any person whose total contribution during

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 Organisation, where the amount so paid is in excess of what may be reasonably paid for such services. Person defined above includes; (i) the author of the trust or the founder of the institution, (ii) any person who has made a substantial contribution to the trust or institution, [that is to say, any person whose total contribution during

GEETA VIDYA MANDIR SIKSHA SAMITI,NARAINGARH vs. ITO, (E), AMBALA

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

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

charitable trust is income as defined vide section 2(24)(iia) of the Act and Corpus donations are exempt from tax u/s 11(1)(d) only if assessee is registered u/s 12A/12AAoftheAct. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) erroneously placed reliance upon appellate decision in the assessee's own case for assessment year

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

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Depreciation As per I.T. Tax 2082820 6546393 5. It is submitted that the assessee has led complete evidence to support each and every items of the aforesaid revised profit and loss account and revised computation of income which shows a loss of Rs.65,46,393/-. It is submitted that if there is a loss of Rs.65,46,393/- which

CT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

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

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

trust, and also failed to maintain separate books of accounts for these business activities. ii. Disallowance of Salary to Specified Person: Salary of Rs. 3,84,000/- paid to JASRAJ SINGH-EXECUTIVE was disallowed, as he was showing other business income ("COMMISSION INCOME FROM PROPERTY"), indicating a diversion of energy and making the salary payment unreasonable under Section

DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. APEEJAY EDUCATION SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross objection

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shrir.L Negi

charitable purposes, especially that there is not even a whisper from learned CIT, Jalandhar-II, Jalandhar, with regard to the non-genuineness of the activities of the trust which are found to be in consonance with the objects of the trust and therefore, the learned CIT, Jalandhar-II, Jalandhar, is not justified in cancelling and withdrawing the registration granted under

SAROJ CHAUDHARY BALA,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD-4, PANCHKULA

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

trust created wholly or partly for charitable or religious purposes or by an institution established wholly or partly for such purposes 45[or by an association or institution referred to in clause (21) or clause (23)46, or by a fund or trust or institution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) 47[or by any university