KAUMARA MADALAYAM,COIMBATORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.680/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2015-16 Kaumara Madalayam, The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Chinnavedampatti Post, Vs. Tax (Exemptions), Coimbatore – 641 049. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aabtk 6034B]. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथG की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri N.V. Krishnan, Advocate IjथG की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2024 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 Assessee 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/250/2023-24/1059915043(1), Dated 19.01.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Coimbatore For The Assessment Year 2015-16 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Vide Order Dated 12.12.2017. :- 2 -: 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

disallowed the exemption claimed under section 10(23BBA) of the Act and CIT(A) sustained the decision of the It is submitted that the CIT(A) failed consider the implication of the second proviso to section 12A(2

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

disallow exemption under section 11 of the Act to assume jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. He argued that in the case of Songwoon Speciality Chemicals India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [2024] 169 taxmann.com 184 (Gujarat), when the claim was accepted in the original assessment proceedings and the Assessing Officer could not have reopened assessment on the same facts which were

D.A.V. EDUCATIONAL TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-4,, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Street, Adambakkam, Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 4, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit 28.10.2025 21.01.2026 : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश/Order 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 Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The

disallow exemption under section 11 of the Act to assume jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. He argued that in the case of Songwoon Speciality Chemicals India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [2024] 169 taxmann.com 184 (Gujarat), when the claim was accepted in the original assessment proceedings and the Assessing Officer could not have reopened assessment on the same facts which were

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

disallowed exemption on the basis that the assessee charging higher rate of interest and carrying out activities of micro finance on commercial lines and considered it as a violative of proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. It was argued that the assessee is not carrying out any activity on commercial lines, however if there are some surplus generated

C.R.ANAND EDUCATIONAL TRUST,MADURAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, MADURAI

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

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2802/Chny/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) C.R. Anand Educational Trust, V Ito, Exemption, Madurai. No. 34, Ganeshapuram, S K. Pudur, Madurai – 625 007. Pan No. : Aabtc1675J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Sankaralingam, Cit (Rtd) & Shri B. Gopalakrishnan, Advocate Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit Dr सुिवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2022 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am:

Section 12A(2) of the Act is applicable to the present case. 8. Having heard to the rival parties and considering the relevant materials available on record, we find in the instant case that the assessee trust was created on 02.12.2008. Its first assessment was done by Ld. AO u/s. 148 on 18.07.2011, however, while passing the re-assessment

M.P. SANTHOSH KUMAR, ITO, CHENNAI vs. GREENPEACE ENVIRONMENT TRUST, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 406/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Greenpeace Environment Trust, Exemptions, Ward-1, Vs. New No.49, Old No.23, Chennai. Ellaiamman Colony, Gopalapuram, Chennai-600 086. [Pan:Aaatg-3538-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. Kumar Chandan, Jcit. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, F.C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am :

12A of the Act having similar objects was not in violation of the provisions of section 13(1)(d) read with section 11(5) of the Act. Where the Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation while working out the application of income in relation to purposes of the assessee-trust in terms of section

M/S ALPHA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice-आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.588/Chny/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Alpha Educational Trust Vs The Dcit (Exemptions), No.2/310, Jeeva Street, Chennai. Mondiamman Nagar, Red Hills, Chennai-600 052. Pan: Aacta 9230A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

2 hence, same may be dismissed as not pressed. The DR has no objection for the same and accordingly, the said issue is dismissed as not pressed. 3. The only surviving issue is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming action of the Assessing Officer in not allowing claim of exemption u/s.11 of the Act holding that the assessee trust

ANDHRA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,CHENNAI vs. ADIT, CHENNAI

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.164/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S. Andhra Chamber Of Commerce, The Assistant Director Of No. 23, Third Cross Street, Vs. Income Tax [Exemptions] - Iii, West Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 035. [Pan: Aaaca7746C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. R. Ilavarasi, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.04.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.07.2016 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Vii, Chennai, Dated 12.09.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2009-10. The First Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is With Regard To Denial Of Exemption Under Section 11 Of The Income Tax Act [“Act” In Short]. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That The Assessee Is Not Entitled To Exemption Under Section 11 Of The Act & Second Ground Relates To Confirmation Of Disallowance Of Depreciation.

disallowance of depreciation. 2 I.T.A. No.164/M/15 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company formed on 17.08.1928 and registered under Companies Act, 1956. The assessee was granted registration under section 12A

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)

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 11 of the Act. 3. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred confirming the treatment of income from kalyanamandapam as business income, despite the decision rendered in earlier Assessment Years treating such income as income from property and consequently erred in sustaining the denial of the exemption u/s.11 of the Act, without

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)

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 11 of the Act. 3. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred confirming the treatment of income from kalyanamandapam as business income, despite the decision rendered in earlier Assessment Years treating such income as income from property and consequently erred in sustaining the denial of the exemption u/s.11 of the Act, without

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)

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 11 of the Act. 3. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred confirming the treatment of income from kalyanamandapam as business income, despite the decision rendered in earlier Assessment Years treating such income as income from property and consequently erred in sustaining the denial of the exemption u/s.11 of the Act, without

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)

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 11 of the Act. 3. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred confirming the treatment of income from kalyanamandapam as business income, despite the decision rendered in earlier Assessment Years treating such income as income from property and consequently erred in sustaining the denial of the exemption u/s.11 of the Act, without

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)

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 11 of the Act. 3. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred confirming the treatment of income from kalyanamandapam as business income, despite the decision rendered in earlier Assessment Years treating such income as income from property and consequently erred in sustaining the denial of the exemption u/s.11 of the Act, without

ST. FRANCIS EDUCATIONAL TRUST,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-2,, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

disallowed the exemption claimed under section 11 of the Act. 2.3 The Learned AO has erred in invoking the provisions of Section 13(1)(c) of the Act without a holistic understanding of the facts of the case”. 6.3 In the written submission, the appellant contested that the trust had obtained term loan based on the collateral security

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

2(15) of the Income Tax Act 1961 would not nullify the principles laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court especially in view of the non-applicability of the said proviso to the factual matrix of the case, due to the fact that running of the kalyana mandapams was not the objects mentioned in the Memorandum of Association

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

2(15) of the Income Tax Act 1961 would not nullify the principles laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court especially in view of the non-applicability of the said proviso to the factual matrix of the case, due to the fact that running of the kalyana mandapams was not the objects mentioned in the Memorandum of Association

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

2(15) of the Income Tax Act 1961 would not nullify the principles laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court especially in view of the non-applicability of the said proviso to the factual matrix of the case, due to the fact that running of the kalyana mandapams was not the objects mentioned in the Memorandum of Association

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

2(15) of the Income Tax Act 1961 would not nullify the principles laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court especially in view of the non-applicability of the said proviso to the factual matrix of the case, due to the fact that running of the kalyana mandapams was not the objects mentioned in the Memorandum of Association

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

2(15) of the Income Tax Act 1961 would not nullify the principles laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court especially in view of the non-applicability of the said proviso to the factual matrix of the case, due to the fact that running of the kalyana mandapams was not the objects mentioned in the Memorandum of Association