SHRIRAM OWNERSHIP TRUST,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 406 & 407/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-2014 & 2014-2015. Shriram Ownership Trust, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.4, Shriram House, I Floor, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Non Corporate Circle 2, Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan Aagts 2243H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

trust created for a religious or charitable purpose. 22. What we find is that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had confirmed the addition u/s. 2(24)(xv) of the Act r.w.s. 56(2)(vii) of the Act. Both these Sections

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

In the result, the appeal stands allowed

56,722/-. The Ld AR accordingly submitted that, the\nfacts on record showed that, the entire surplus from the petrol bunk of\nRs.73,27,209/- had been applied towards the educational activities,\nnamely the music school and library activities of the assessee Trust. In\nlight of these facts, the Ld AR gave us a brief overview of the history

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BIBIKULAM MADURAI vs. D N PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST, ARASARADI MADURAI TAMIL NADU

Charitable Trust and CT Scan, MRI Scan &\nUSC fees shown by the company in its P & L account for the A.Υ. 2012-13 to\nAY 2017-18. The same is tabulated as below:\nSL No\nAY\nTotal fees receipts\nmade out of CT\nscan, MRI scan and\nUltra sound machine\nby the Company (in\nRs.)\nCT scan\nfees\ntransferred

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

Charitable Trust (supra), we hold the activity of sale of uniforms, textbooks, etc. and the excess of income over expenditure arising thereon which are disclosed in Form-10A are incidental to the attainment of objects of the assessee. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of section 11 of the Act for the year under consideration, accordingly, we hold

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BIBIKULAM MADURAI vs. D N PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST, ARASARADI MADURAI TAMIL NADU

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed\nand Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Charitable Trust and CT Scan, MRI Scan &\nUSC fees shown by the company in its P & L account for the A.Υ. 2012-13 to\nAY 2017-18. The same is tabulated as below:\nSL\nNo\nAY\nTotal fees receipts\nmade out of CT\nscan, MRI scan and\nUltra sound machine\nby the Company (in\nRs.)\nCT scan\nfees\ntransferred

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. EVERWIN EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST, KOLATHUR, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

56,567/- and admitting NIL income\nafter claiming exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The case of the assessee was\nselected for regular scrutiny which was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act\non 26.12.2018 accepting the returned income. Later on the Ld.\nCommissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [ in short `CIT(E)'] in exercise\nof revisionary jurisdiction vested

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. SRINIVASAN CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST, PERAMBALUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 1424, who shall estimate the fair market value of the property in ITA Nos.28, 29, 30, 31, 55, 56 & 57/Chny/2024 (AYs: 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2017-18) M/s. Srinivasan Charitable & Educational Trust

SRINIVASAN CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PERAMBALUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL COIRCLE-2, , TRICHY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 1424, who shall estimate the fair market value of the property in ITA Nos.28, 29, 30, 31, 55, 56 & 57/Chny/2024 (AYs: 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2017-18) M/s. Srinivasan Charitable & Educational Trust

SRINIVASAN CHARITABLE AND EDUCATION TRUST,PERAMBALUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-2, , TRICHY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 1424, who shall estimate the fair market value of the property in ITA Nos.28, 29, 30, 31, 55, 56 & 57/Chny/2024 (AYs: 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2017-18) M/s. Srinivasan Charitable & Educational Trust

SRINIVASAN CHRITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST, ,PERAMBALUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 1424, who shall estimate the fair market value of the property in ITA Nos.28, 29, 30, 31, 55, 56 & 57/Chny/2024 (AYs: 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2017-18) M/s. Srinivasan Charitable & Educational Trust

SRINIVASAN CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST,PERAMBALUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , TRICHY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 1424, who shall estimate the fair market value of the property in ITA Nos.28, 29, 30, 31, 55, 56 & 57/Chny/2024 (AYs: 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2017-18) M/s. Srinivasan Charitable & Educational Trust

SRINIVASAN CHARITABLE AND EDUCATION TRUST,PERAMBALUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 1424, who shall estimate the fair market value of the property in ITA Nos.28, 29, 30, 31, 55, 56 & 57/Chny/2024 (AYs: 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2017-18) M/s. Srinivasan Charitable & Educational Trust

SRINIVASAN CHARITABLE AND EDUCATION TRUST,PERAMBALUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and appeal filed by the

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

section 1424, who shall estimate the fair market value of the property in ITA Nos.28, 29, 30, 31, 55, 56 & 57/Chny/2024 (AYs: 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2012-13, 2014-15 & 2017-18) M/s. Srinivasan Charitable & Educational Trust

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. JAYA EDUCATIONAL TRUST, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1552/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. The Dcit, Jaya Educational Trust, Chennai. No.8, Krishnapuram, Ii Main Road, Thiruninravur, Thiruvallur-602 024. [Pan:Aaatj 0369 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

56,492/- 4 Srinivasa Educational Trust 9,95,81,108/- 7. From the above, it is seen that the advances made during the AY 2012-13 are still outstanding in the books of the Trust even during the AY 2015-16. Since, the assessee is not charging any Interest on the advances given to Sri Venkata Reddy and Smt. Subhasini

RAMASAMI PALANISAMY,TIRUPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), ERODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

trust has been treated as business income\nin the nature of adventure and taxed accordingly.\n8. The assessee has objected for invoking the provisions of section 56(2)(vil)\nof the Income Tax Act for receiving any sum of money without consideration.\nThe assessee has argued that since the amount of Rs.18,92,30,000/- has\nalready been offered

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]

56 & 56A, Thirumalai Pillai though Shri.Sampath a trustee was not a violation falling under Section 13(1) (c) of the Act. 20 CIT(A) erroneously held that --- 7 to 7.2 5 to 5.2 10.2 Purchase of property by Preetha, daughter-in-law of Managing Trustee for 40 lakhs, though a loan application showed the value as 1.25 crore, and there

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]

56 & 56A, Thirumalai Pillai though Shri.Sampath a trustee was not a violation falling under Section 13(1) (c) of the Act. 20 CIT(A) erroneously held that --- 7 to 7.2 5 to 5.2 10.2 Purchase of property by Preetha, daughter-in-law of Managing Trustee for 40 lakhs, though a loan application showed the value as 1.25 crore, and there

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]

56 & 56A, Thirumalai Pillai though Shri.Sampath a trustee was not a violation falling under Section 13(1) (c) of the Act. 20 CIT(A) erroneously held that --- 7 to 7.2 5 to 5.2 10.2 Purchase of property by Preetha, daughter-in-law of Managing Trustee for 40 lakhs, though a loan application showed the value as 1.25 crore, and there