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

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

56,06,937 Balance Accrued 6,77,21,602 12,80,35,221 Interest W/off 8.12 It is seen that, even the AO has acknowledged in the impugned order that, the bad debts written off, was out of the interest income offered to tax in the earlier years. In our considered view therefore, the twin conditions laid down in Section

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

56,06,937 Balance Accrued 6,77,21,602 12,80,35,221 Interest W/off 8.12 It is seen that, even the AO has acknowledged in the impugned order that, the bad debts written off, was out of the interest income offered to tax in the earlier years. In our considered view therefore, the twin conditions laid down in Section

AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS WARD 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the 13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285 & 286/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 1997-98, 1998-99, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-2014 & 2014-15. M/S. Avm Charities, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.101, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Exemptions Ward 1, Mylapore, Chennai. Chennai 600 004. [Pan Aaata 0512F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

56 of the Income-tax Act with reference to the income by letting out building for marriages. Having noticed that the building was let out by the assessee to others for functions such as marriages and other functions and making available the premises for limited periods, and chairs, mikes, etc., were also made available to others for which a charge

AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS WARD 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the 13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285 & 286/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 1997-98, 1998-99, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-2014 & 2014-15. M/S. Avm Charities, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.101, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Exemptions Ward 1, Mylapore, Chennai. Chennai 600 004. [Pan Aaata 0512F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

56 of the Income-tax Act with reference to the income by letting out building for marriages. Having noticed that the building was let out by the assessee to others for functions such as marriages and other functions and making available the premises for limited periods, and chairs, mikes, etc., were also made available to others for which a charge

AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS WARD 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the 13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285 & 286/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 1997-98, 1998-99, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-2014 & 2014-15. M/S. Avm Charities, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.101, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Exemptions Ward 1, Mylapore, Chennai. Chennai 600 004. [Pan Aaata 0512F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

56 of the Income-tax Act with reference to the income by letting out building for marriages. Having noticed that the building was let out by the assessee to others for functions such as marriages and other functions and making available the premises for limited periods, and chairs, mikes, etc., were also made available to others for which a charge

AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS WARD 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the 13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285 & 286/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 1997-98, 1998-99, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-2014 & 2014-15. M/S. Avm Charities, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.101, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Exemptions Ward 1, Mylapore, Chennai. Chennai 600 004. [Pan Aaata 0512F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

56 of the Income-tax Act with reference to the income by letting out building for marriages. Having noticed that the building was let out by the assessee to others for functions such as marriages and other functions and making available the premises for limited periods, and chairs, mikes, etc., were also made available to others for which a charge

AVM CHARITIES,CHENNAI vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS WARD 1, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the 13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285 & 286/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 1997-98, 1998-99, 2006-07, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-2014 & 2014-15. M/S. Avm Charities, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.101, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Exemptions Ward 1, Mylapore, Chennai. Chennai 600 004. [Pan Aaata 0512F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

56 of the Income-tax Act with reference to the income by letting out building for marriages. Having noticed that the building was let out by the assessee to others for functions such as marriages and other functions and making available the premises for limited periods, and chairs, mikes, etc., were also made available to others for which a charge

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)

vii) The Hon'ble Tribunal after analyzing the entire facts of the case, held in paras 15, 16 & 17 that the loans given to the above two persons would not be covered u/s.13(2)(cc) and thus, not resulting in any benefit, directly or indirectly to the interested persons so as to attract the provisions of sec.13

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Charitable\nTrust to have paid excess purchase consideration, in violation of Section\n13(3) of the Act (since Mr. TSRK and M/s.Hindusthan Educational &\nCharitable Trust were related persons) and had accordingly taxed the\nbuyer as well. On these facts, we therefore hold that, the Ld. CIT(A) had\nfactually erred in holding the assessee to be owner/transferor of the\nimpugned

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]

2 2 0 2 2 0 07-08 0 0 0 45 30 15 45 30 15 08-09 15 9 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Repea t A.Y 02-03 to 08-09 59 43 86 48 38 173 98 75 Total 102 58% 42% 56% 44% 57% 43% iv. There is another angle from which

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]

2 2 0 2 2 0 07-08 0 0 0 45 30 15 45 30 15 08-09 15 9 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Repea t A.Y 02-03 to 08-09 59 43 86 48 38 173 98 75 Total 102 58% 42% 56% 44% 57% 43% iv. There is another angle from which

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]

2 2 0 2 2 0 07-08 0 0 0 45 30 15 45 30 15 08-09 15 9 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Repea t A.Y 02-03 to 08-09 59 43 86 48 38 173 98 75 Total 102 58% 42% 56% 44% 57% 43% iv. There is another angle from which

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]

2 2 0 2 2 0 07-08 0 0 0 45 30 15 45 30 15 08-09 15 9 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Repea t A.Y 02-03 to 08-09 59 43 86 48 38 173 98 75 Total 102 58% 42% 56% 44% 57% 43% iv. There is another angle from which

ITO, CHENNAI vs. SRI THYAGA BRAHMA GANA SABHA, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

VII, dated 14.08.2013 in ITA No.294/12-13 observed that the assessee’s society falls within the ambit of residual of Sec. 2(15) of the Act and allowed appeal in favour of the assessee and ld. Authorised Representative also relied on the decisions. (i) Mylapore Fine Arts Club in ITA No.1706/Mds/10, dated 12.09.2011. (ii) Hamsadhwani in ITA No.494/Mds/2011, dated

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

VII (ITA No 178/Bang/2012), ICICI Emerging Sectors Fund (ITA No. 179/Bang/2012), ITAT Bangalore 3. Indian Corporate Loan Securitization Trust Vs ITO (ITA No.3986/Mum/2013) – ITAT Mumbai ITA Nos.1345 & 1401/Mds/2016 & ITA Nos.1902, 981 & 982/Mds/2016 :- 10 -: 4. ITO Vs Milestone Army Navy Trust (ITA Nos 4067/Mum/2014) - Without prejudice, the Apex court and other High Courts have held that even in the case

ITO, CHENNAI vs. TVS SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

VII (ITA No 178/Bang/2012), ICICI Emerging Sectors Fund (ITA No. 179/Bang/2012), ITAT Bangalore 3. Indian Corporate Loan Securitization Trust Vs ITO (ITA No.3986/Mum/2013) – ITAT Mumbai ITA Nos.1345 & 1401/Mds/2016 & ITA Nos.1902, 981 & 982/Mds/2016 :- 10 -: 4. ITO Vs Milestone Army Navy Trust (ITA Nos 4067/Mum/2014) - Without prejudice, the Apex court and other High Courts have held that even in the case

ITO, CHENNAI vs. TVS SHRIRAM GRWOTH FUND, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

VII (ITA No 178/Bang/2012), ICICI Emerging Sectors Fund (ITA No. 179/Bang/2012), ITAT Bangalore 3. Indian Corporate Loan Securitization Trust Vs ITO (ITA No.3986/Mum/2013) – ITAT Mumbai ITA Nos.1345 & 1401/Mds/2016 & ITA Nos.1902, 981 & 982/Mds/2016 :- 10 -: 4. ITO Vs Milestone Army Navy Trust (ITA Nos 4067/Mum/2014) - Without prejudice, the Apex court and other High Courts have held that even in the case

T vs. SHRIRAM GROWTH FUND,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the Revenue’s appeals dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

VII (ITA No 178/Bang/2012), ICICI Emerging Sectors Fund (ITA No. 179/Bang/2012), ITAT Bangalore 3. Indian Corporate Loan Securitization Trust Vs ITO (ITA No.3986/Mum/2013) – ITAT Mumbai ITA Nos.1345 & 1401/Mds/2016 & ITA Nos.1902, 981 & 982/Mds/2016 :- 10 -: 4. ITO Vs Milestone Army Navy Trust (ITA Nos 4067/Mum/2014) - Without prejudice, the Apex court and other High Courts have held that even in the case