ITO, CHENNAI vs. M/S. INDIAN CULTURAL RESEARCH TRUST, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.586/Chny/2015, 2976, 2977 & 2978/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer [Exemptions], Vs. M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Ward-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Building, 3Rd Floor, 121 M.G. Road, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006. Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaatt0483G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3018, 3019 & 3020/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Vs. The Income Tax Officer Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Anna [Exemptions], Ward-1, Salai, Chennai 600 006. Chennai (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Jothilakshmi Nayak, Cit & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: There Are Three Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 12.12.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Orders Dated 05.08.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11

64,278/- respectively. b) The Gross receipts for the year under construction is Rs.3,58,21,185/- and we have an expenditure of Rs.70,94,341/- to earn the above mentioned income of the trust and we have applied excess of income during the year after charities done to the extent of Rs.3,06,166/- the balance amount towards construction

ITO, CHENNAI vs. THE INDIAN CULTURAL RESEARCH TRUST, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.586/Chny/2015, 2976, 2977 & 2978/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer [Exemptions], Vs. M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Ward-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Building, 3Rd Floor, 121 M.G. Road, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006. Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaatt0483G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3018, 3019 & 3020/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Vs. The Income Tax Officer Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Anna [Exemptions], Ward-1, Salai, Chennai 600 006. Chennai (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Jothilakshmi Nayak, Cit & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: There Are Three Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 12.12.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Orders Dated 05.08.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11

64,278/- respectively. b) The Gross receipts for the year under construction is Rs.3,58,21,185/- and we have an expenditure of Rs.70,94,341/- to earn the above mentioned income of the trust and we have applied excess of income during the year after charities done to the extent of Rs.3,06,166/- the balance amount towards construction

THE INDIAN CULTURAL RESEARCH TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.586/Chny/2015, 2976, 2977 & 2978/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer [Exemptions], Vs. M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Ward-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Building, 3Rd Floor, 121 M.G. Road, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006. Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaatt0483G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3018, 3019 & 3020/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Vs. The Income Tax Officer Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Anna [Exemptions], Ward-1, Salai, Chennai 600 006. Chennai (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Jothilakshmi Nayak, Cit & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: There Are Three Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 12.12.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Orders Dated 05.08.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11

64,278/- respectively. b) The Gross receipts for the year under construction is Rs.3,58,21,185/- and we have an expenditure of Rs.70,94,341/- to earn the above mentioned income of the trust and we have applied excess of income during the year after charities done to the extent of Rs.3,06,166/- the balance amount towards construction

THE INDIAN CULTURAL RESEARCH TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.586/Chny/2015, 2976, 2977 & 2978/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer [Exemptions], Vs. M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Ward-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Building, 3Rd Floor, 121 M.G. Road, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006. Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaatt0483G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3018, 3019 & 3020/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Vs. The Income Tax Officer Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Anna [Exemptions], Ward-1, Salai, Chennai 600 006. Chennai (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Jothilakshmi Nayak, Cit & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: There Are Three Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 12.12.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Orders Dated 05.08.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11

64,278/- respectively. b) The Gross receipts for the year under construction is Rs.3,58,21,185/- and we have an expenditure of Rs.70,94,341/- to earn the above mentioned income of the trust and we have applied excess of income during the year after charities done to the extent of Rs.3,06,166/- the balance amount towards construction

ITO, CHENNAI vs. M/S. INDIAN CULTURAL RESEARCH TRUST, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.586/Chny/2015, 2976, 2977 & 2978/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer [Exemptions], Vs. M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Ward-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Building, 3Rd Floor, 121 M.G. Road, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006. Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaatt0483G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3018, 3019 & 3020/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Vs. The Income Tax Officer Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Anna [Exemptions], Ward-1, Salai, Chennai 600 006. Chennai (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Jothilakshmi Nayak, Cit & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: There Are Three Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 12.12.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Orders Dated 05.08.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11

64,278/- respectively. b) The Gross receipts for the year under construction is Rs.3,58,21,185/- and we have an expenditure of Rs.70,94,341/- to earn the above mentioned income of the trust and we have applied excess of income during the year after charities done to the extent of Rs.3,06,166/- the balance amount towards construction

ITO, CHENNAI vs. M/S. INDIAN CULTURAL RESEARCH TRUST, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.586/Chny/2015, 2976, 2977 & 2978/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer [Exemptions], Vs. M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Ward-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Building, 3Rd Floor, 121 M.G. Road, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 006. Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaatt0483G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3018, 3019 & 3020/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2010-11, 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/S. The Indian Cultural Research Vs. The Income Tax Officer Trust, Rani Seethai Hall, 603, Anna [Exemptions], Ward-1, Salai, Chennai 600 006. Chennai (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Jothilakshmi Nayak, Cit & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: There Are Three Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 12.12.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12 & Orders Dated 05.08.2016 For The Assessment Years 2010-11

64,278/- respectively. b) The Gross receipts for the year under construction is Rs.3,58,21,185/- and we have an expenditure of Rs.70,94,341/- to earn the above mentioned income of the trust and we have applied excess of income during the year after charities done to the extent of Rs.3,06,166/- the balance amount towards construction

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, CHENNAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.679/Chny/2024 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Dy. Commissioner Of The Indian Institute Of Engineering Income Tax, Vs. Technology, Exemptions Circle, 363, Arcot Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Aaatt 2768C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथH की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate JkथH की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R. Raghunatha, A.M : This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter “Cit(A)] In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1059500064(1), Dated 09.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Assessing Officer For The Assessment Year 2012-13 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Vide Order Dated 20.03.2015. :- 2 -: 2. There Is A Delay Of 06 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Revenue.

charitable trust, registered U/s.12AA of the Act, vide DIT(E) No.2(41)/91-92 dated 29/06/1993. The assessee trust is created to establish institutions for studies and research for the advancement of knowledge, skill, training and education for every kind including technology, engineering and professional studies and to construct and acquire building, structures, equipments, implements whatsoever necessary for the purpose. Towards

ACIT, TRICHY vs. GRAMA VIDIYAL TRUST, TRICHY

In the result, appeal of Revenue in 345/2013 is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G.Pavan Kumar

section 11 of the Income tax Act. 5.1 Regarding the payment of `22,44,016 paid to the activists for social alternatives (ASA), the CIT(A) observed that the assessee Trust has donated this amount for doing charitable activities of the ASA Trust, which is having similar objectives such as lending microfinance self help groups / NGOs /Trusts I Societies

ACIT, TRICHY vs. GRAMA VIDIYAL TRUST, TRICHY

In the result, appeal of Revenue in 345/2013 is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G.Pavan Kumar

section 11 of the Income tax Act. 5.1 Regarding the payment of `22,44,016 paid to the activists for social alternatives (ASA), the CIT(A) observed that the assessee Trust has donated this amount for doing charitable activities of the ASA Trust, which is having similar objectives such as lending microfinance self help groups / NGOs /Trusts I Societies

ITO, TRICHY vs. GRAMA VIDIYAL TRUST, TRICHY

In the result, appeal of Revenue in 345/2013 is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G.Pavan Kumar

section 11 of the Income tax Act. 5.1 Regarding the payment of `22,44,016 paid to the activists for social alternatives (ASA), the CIT(A) observed that the assessee Trust has donated this amount for doing charitable activities of the ASA Trust, which is having similar objectives such as lending microfinance self help groups / NGOs /Trusts I Societies

M/S INNOVTIVE MICROFINANCE FOR POVERTY ALLEVIATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT(EXEMPTIONS),CHENNAI CIRCLE, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Jagadish

sections of the society. The Ld.AO has not substantiated his findings, that the work of the trust is not charitable and the interest charged by the assessee does not commensurate with the cost incurred by it. The Ld.AO placed nothing on record to show that the assessee is charging exorbitant interest. The action of the Ld.AO might have justified

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]

Charitable Public Trust (Mad) reported in 374 ITR 274, the Hon'ble Madras High Court held as follows:- "Held, dismissing the appeal, (i) that the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal had come to the conclusion that the donations received did not partake of the character of capitation fee. There was no element of involuntary nature in the donations. A specific

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]

Charitable Public Trust (Mad) reported in 374 ITR 274, the Hon'ble Madras High Court held as follows:- "Held, dismissing the appeal, (i) that the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal had come to the conclusion that the donations received did not partake of the character of capitation fee. There was no element of involuntary nature in the donations. A specific

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]

Charitable Public Trust (Mad) reported in 374 ITR 274, the Hon'ble Madras High Court held as follows:- "Held, dismissing the appeal, (i) that the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal had come to the conclusion that the donations received did not partake of the character of capitation fee. There was no element of involuntary nature in the donations. A specific

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]

Charitable Public Trust (Mad) reported in 374 ITR 274, the Hon'ble Madras High Court held as follows:- "Held, dismissing the appeal, (i) that the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal had come to the conclusion that the donations received did not partake of the character of capitation fee. There was no element of involuntary nature in the donations. A specific

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

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1302 To 1304/Chny/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2016-17 & Cross-Objection Nos.1 To 3/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2016-17 The Ito (Exemptions Ward), Bibikulam, Madurai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. M/S.D.N. Public Charitable 13, Theni Main Road, Arasaradi, Madurai-625 016. [Pan: Aaatd 9013 C] Trust, (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent/Cross- Objector) Department By Assessee By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : Dr. Samuel Pitta, Jcit : Mr. Arjun Raj, Advocate : 22.08.2024 : 09.10.2024 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

Charitable Trust and CT Scan, MRI Scan & USC fees shown by the company in its P & L account for the A.Υ. 2012-13 to AY 2017-18. The same is tabulated as below: SL No AY Total fees receipts made out of CT scan, MRI scan and Ultra sound machine by the Company (in Rs.) CT scan fees transferred

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-2(4), CHENNAI vs. D R BALAKRISHNA RAJA, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:3342 To 3344/Chny/2018 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Shri. D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Acit, 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (()यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:91 To 94/Chny/2019 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 Dcit, Shri D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Central Circle -2(4), Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Chennai. T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. K.G.Raghunath, Advocate Department By : Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई क5 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 घोषणा क5 तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

charitable organization belongs to the public. Consequently, no retiring or outgoing trustee/member can claim compensation or consideration from the remaining or incoming trustees. Therefore, any such claim is not legally valid, and no monetary consideration can be attributed to the relinquishment of interest in the trust. 50. It cannot be accepted that the impugned amount of Rs.20.00 crores was separately

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-2(4), CHENNAI vs. D R BALAKRISHNA RAJA, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:3342 To 3344/Chny/2018 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Shri. D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Acit, 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (()यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:91 To 94/Chny/2019 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 Dcit, Shri D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Central Circle -2(4), Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Chennai. T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. K.G.Raghunath, Advocate Department By : Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई क5 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 घोषणा क5 तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

charitable organization belongs to the public. Consequently, no retiring or outgoing trustee/member can claim compensation or consideration from the remaining or incoming trustees. Therefore, any such claim is not legally valid, and no monetary consideration can be attributed to the relinquishment of interest in the trust. 50. It cannot be accepted that the impugned amount of Rs.20.00 crores was separately