M/S JAYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,THIRUVALLUR vs. DCIT, CC1(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14 are allowed and for the assessment years

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2915, 3114, 3115/Chny/2019 & 916/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18

section 139 of the Act, by filing electronic Form No.10 within due date prescribed under the Act for both assessment years. We, further noted that the Hon’ble 41 I.TA. Nos. 2915, 3114 & 3115/Chny/2019 916/Chny/2020 Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur Hotel Owners Association, (2001) 247 ITR 201 has held that if Form No.10 required

JAYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRL CIRCLE 1 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14 are allowed and for the assessment years

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2915, 3114, 3115/Chny/2019 & 916/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18

section 139 of the Act, by filing electronic Form No.10 within due date prescribed under the Act for both assessment years. We, further noted that the Hon’ble 41 I.TA. Nos. 2915, 3114 & 3115/Chny/2019 916/Chny/2020 Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur Hotel Owners Association, (2001) 247 ITR 201 has held that if Form No.10 required

JAYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CENTRL CIRCLE 1 (2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14 are allowed and for the assessment years

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2915, 3114, 3115/Chny/2019 & 916/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18

section 139 of the Act, by filing electronic Form No.10 within due date prescribed under the Act for both assessment years. We, further noted that the Hon’ble 41 I.TA. Nos. 2915, 3114 & 3115/Chny/2019 916/Chny/2020 Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Nagpur Hotel Owners Association, (2001) 247 ITR 201 has held that if Form No.10 required

ST.JOSEPHS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-193), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Charitable Trust enjoying registration w.e.f. 29.05.2012 u/s.12AA of the Act and pursuant to a search conducted in its premises on 07.11.2019, assessee- Trust agreed to treat the corpus donation of Rs.24 lakhs as voluntary contribution since it couldn’t furnish the confirmation letter from the donors and then filed the RoI for the searched AY 2020-21 on 05.01.2021 declaring

ST. JOSEPHS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCOT. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Charitable Trust enjoying registration w.e.f. 29.05.2012 u/s.12AA of the Act and pursuant to a search conducted in its premises on 07.11.2019, assessee- Trust agreed to treat the corpus donation of Rs.24 lakhs as voluntary contribution since it couldn’t furnish the confirmation letter from the donors and then filed the RoI for the searched AY 2020-21 on 05.01.2021 declaring

DCIT, CC2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Charitable Trust 1,12,53,64,017 5. Jayapriya Food products private limited 4,59,82,869 6. Jayapriya property developers private limited 2,43,54,370 7. Jayapriya Trading Company 8,26,56,356 8. Land Advance-APJ Abdulkalam Educational Trust 4,063,74,000 Total 1,61,89,97,220/- 10.4 It is observed that the assessee

DCIT, CEN CIR 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Charitable Trust 1,12,53,64,017 5. Jayapriya Food products private limited 4,59,82,869 6. Jayapriya property developers private limited 2,43,54,370 7. Jayapriya Trading Company 8,26,56,356 8. Land Advance-APJ Abdulkalam Educational Trust 4,063,74,000 Total 1,61,89,97,220/- 10.4 It is observed that the assessee

SMT. LINGAMMAL RAMARAJU SHASTRA PRATHISHTA TRUST,RAJAPALAYAM vs. ACIT (EXEMPTIONS), COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal stands allowed

Section 11(4A) stood\nsatisfied. We thus hold that, the view adopted by the AO cannot be said to\nbe erroneous or an unsustainable view in law and therefore the Ld. CIT(E)\nwas unjustified in holding the assessment order to be erroneous as well as\nprejudicial to the revenue.\n46. Apart from the above, we also find merit

DDIT, CHENNAI vs. VELS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & ADVANCED STUDIES,, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and the cross- objection of the assessee stand dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1759/Mds/2013 & C.O. No.15/Mds/2014 (In I.T.A. No.1759/Mds/2013) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

Trust is registered as charitable institution and it is claiming exemption under Section 11 of the Act. The claim of the assessee under Section 11 of the Act is allowed by the CIT(Appeals) which was confirmed by this Tribunal in the earlier part of this order. It is not the case of the assessee that it is not doing

ST. JOSHEPHS INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-193), CHENNAI

Charitable\nTrust enjoying registration w.e.f. 29.05.2012 u/s.12AA of the Act and\npursuant to a search conducted in its premises on 07.11.2019, assessee-\nTrust agreed to treat the corpus donation of Rs.24 lakhs as voluntary\ncontribution since it couldn't furnish the confirmation letter from the\ndonors and then filed the Rol for the searched AY 2020-21 on 05.01.2021\ndeclaring

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

43 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 (vi) Whether advance of Rs.1,00,00,000/- paid to Shri. Arjunlal Sunderdoss during previous year relevant to assessment year 2006-07 and Rs.50,00,000/- during previous year relevant to assessment year 2007-08, were diversion of income/property of the trust attracting Section 13(1) ( c) of the Act. (vii) Whether acquisition of property

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

43 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 (vi) Whether advance of Rs.1,00,00,000/- paid to Shri. Arjunlal Sunderdoss during previous year relevant to assessment year 2006-07 and Rs.50,00,000/- during previous year relevant to assessment year 2007-08, were diversion of income/property of the trust attracting Section 13(1) ( c) of the Act. (vii) Whether acquisition of property

VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CC IV(1), CHENNAI

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

43 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 (vi) Whether advance of Rs.1,00,00,000/- paid to Shri. Arjunlal Sunderdoss during previous year relevant to assessment year 2006-07 and Rs.50,00,000/- during previous year relevant to assessment year 2007-08, were diversion of income/property of the trust attracting Section 13(1) ( c) of the Act. (vii) Whether acquisition of property

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

43 -: & 2219 to 2222 /2017 (vi) Whether advance of Rs.1,00,00,000/- paid to Shri. Arjunlal Sunderdoss during previous year relevant to assessment year 2006-07 and Rs.50,00,000/- during previous year relevant to assessment year 2007-08, were diversion of income/property of the trust attracting Section 13(1) ( c) of the Act. (vii) Whether acquisition of property

ST. JOSEPHS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-193), CHENNAI

Charitable\nTrust enjoying registration w.e.f. 29.05.2012 u/s.12AA of the Act and\npursuant to a search conducted in its premises on 07.11.2019, assessee-\nTrust agreed to treat the corpus donation of Rs.24 lakhs as voluntary\ncontribution since it couldn't furnish the confirmation letter from the\ndonors and then filed the Rol for the searched AY 2020-21 on 05.01.2021\ndeclaring

MADURAI AGRI BUSINESS INCUBATION FORUM ,COIMBATORE vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

CHARITABLE TRUST CASE & rejected on ITA 1136/CHNY/2023 12A(1)(ac)(vi) 80G(5)(iii) 26.02.2020 by CIT(E), thus assessee is filing as new trust case. It was argued that these trust cases have applied for registration u/s 12A of the Act as a new trust case. It was brought to our notice that in some of these cases such

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

43 I.T.A. Nos.1667 to 1670/Chny/24 making bumper profits, the Assessing Officer held that the activity of the assessee is only a commercial activity, not falling under any of the charitable activities, as per the objects of the trust, further, said activity does not fall under any of the limbs defined in section 2(15) of the Act, viz., relief

SANTHOME CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST,ERODE vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD CHENNAI, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.498/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: - V. Santhome Charitable & The Income Tax Officer, Educational Trust, Exemption Ward, 378, Shenbagapudur, Chennai. Sathyamangalam, Erode District-638 402. [Pan: Aaots 6317 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

43 taxmann.com 243 ii. CIT v Christian Medical College - High Court of Punjab and Haryana 61 taxmann.com 68 Santhome Charitable & Educational Trust :: 5 :: iii. CIT v Chandra Charitable Trust - High Court of Gujarat - 156 Taxman 19 iv. Diocese of Pune v CIT - ITAT Pune - 57 taxmann.com 175 v. Amritsar Diocese of Believers Eastern Church y/ CIT (Exemptions) - ITAT Amritsar

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TAMIL NADU CRICKET ASSOCIATION, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue as well as the cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2556 & 2557/Mds/2016 & C.O. Nos.158 & 159/Mds/2016 (In Ita Nos.2556 & 2557/Mds/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

43, taken to be twenty-five thousand rupees, the moneys payable in respect of such motor car shall be taken to be a sum which bears to the amount for which the motor car is sold or, as the case may be, the amount of any insurance, salvage or compensation moneys payable in respect thereof (including the amount of scrap