SREE DHARMA SASTHA HARIHARA SEVA CHARITABLE TEMPLE TRUST,ERUMELY vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundrarajan K., Jm

11 of the Act. In the totality of the above said facts and circumstances, we hold that the assessee is a charitable religious trust and the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act would not be applicable. In view thereof, we direct the Commissioner to grant registration to the assessee under section 12A of the Act as charitable

M/S.BELIEVERS EASTERN CHURCH,THIRUVALLA vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

trusts had complied with all three conditions laid down under Section 11(2) of the Act: 1. Form 10 was filed timely specifying the purpose; 2. Funds were invested as per Section 11(5); 3. Accumulated amounts were utilized within five years strictly for declared purposes. Hence, the allegation is false and ought not be upheld. e) Allegation: Capital expenditure

LAST HOUR MINISTRY,THIRUVALLA vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

trusts had complied with all three conditions laid down under Section 11(2) of the Act: 1. Form 10 was filed timely specifying the purpose; 2. Funds were invested as per Section 11(5); 3. Accumulated amounts were utilized within five years strictly for declared purposes. Hence, the allegation is false and ought not be upheld. e) Allegation: Capital expenditure

AYANA CHARITABLE TRUST,THIRUVALLA vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), TRIVANDRUM

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

trusts had complied with all three conditions laid down under Section 11(2) of the Act: 1. Form 10 was filed timely specifying the purpose; 2. Funds were invested as per Section 11(5); 3. Accumulated amounts were utilized within five years strictly for declared purposes. Hence, the allegation is false and ought not be upheld. e) Allegation: Capital expenditure

LOVE INDIA MINISTRIES,THIRUVALLA vs. THE DCIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

trusts had complied with all three conditions laid down under Section 11(2) of the Act: 1. Form 10 was filed timely specifying the purpose; 2. Funds were invested as per Section 11(5); 3. Accumulated amounts were utilized within five years strictly for declared purposes. Hence, the allegation is false and ought not be upheld. e) Allegation: Capital expenditure

SREE ANJANEYA MEDICAL TRUST,KOZHIKODE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2 (1), KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust Acit, Circle - 2 17/501X-1, Kanchas Building Aayakar Bhavan Opp. Indoor Stadium Mananachira Vs. Rajaji Road, New Bus Stand Kozhikode 673001 Kozhikode 673004 [Pan: Aahts3844B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

charitable trust, running medical college. The assessee in the year under consideration shown receipt of Rs. 50 Lakh toward corpus fund received from trustee which was claimed as exempted under section 11 of the Act. 2 Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust 4. However, the AO in the proceeding under section 147 of the Act found that the registration of assessee under

ALL INDIA SPICES EXPORTERS FORUM,ERNAKULAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, ERNAKULAM

Appeal is allowed, Ground No

Bench: The Expiry Of Time Allowed U/S 139(1). As Per Section 11(2), As Applicable For Ay 2014-15 There Was No Date Specified As To The Period Within Which The Form Has To Be Filed For Availing Exemption. The Amendment In Section 11(2) That Filing Of Necessary Forms Before The Due Date Of Filing Return As A Pre-Condition To Claim The Exemption Under Section 11(2) Was Substituted By The Finance Act With Effect From 01.04.2016 Which Is Not Applicable For Ay 2014- 15. Hence The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Went Wrong In Denying The Exemption.

trust or institution. xx xx xx xx Further, as per the existing provisions of said section, the entities registered under section 12AA are required to file return of income under sub-section (4A) of section 139, if the total income without giving effect to the provisions of sections 11 and 12 exceeds the maximum amount which is not chargeable

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOCHI vs. YOGAKSHEMA TRUST, ALUVA

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Income Tax Officer .......... Appellant 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Old Railway Station Road, Cochi 682018 [Pan: Aaaty0284A] Vs. Yogakshema Trust .......... Respondent Keshava Smrithi, Chitra Lane, Aluva 683101

section 11(2) of the IT Act to the extent that the purpose for which the amount is accumulated or set part is not specific and too general. 5. The CIT(A) relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) vs. Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purshottam Public Charitable Trust

VISHWAKARMA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT , EXEMPTION CIRCLE, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Dasvishwakarma Dy. Cit (Exemptions) Educational Trust Aayakar Bhavan 14, Ulloor Lane Peroorkada Road, Kowdiar Vs. Dpi Junction, Jagathy Thiruvananthapuram 695003 Trivandurm 695014 [Pan:Aaatv1824D] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, Ca Revenue By: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 12.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement:11.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, Am This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Agitating The Dismissal Of It’S Appeal Contesting The Processing Of It’S Return Of Income Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Dated 30.10.2019 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19,By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department (Nfac, Delhi) [Cit(A)] Vide Order Dated 25.7.2022. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, A Charitable Trust Registered U/S. 12Aa Of The Act, Filed It’S Return Of Income For The Relevant Year On 28.8.2018 Declaring Nil Income, I.E., Claiming Exemption U/S. 11 On The Entirety Of It’S Income. The Same Was Processed U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act, Denying It The Benefit Of Section 11 Of The Act, I.E., At An Income Of Rs. 13,34,692. The Denial Of Exemption Was For The Reason Of Non-Audit Of It’S Accounts And, Consequently, Non-Filing Of The Audit Report, Required To Be Filed In The Prescribed Form (Form 10B), Along With The Return Of

section 11(1)(a) of the Act. Taking us through the assessee’s return for the year (copy on record), it was explained to us by Ms. Ammal during hearing that expenditure amounting to Rs. 1,11,208 has also been regarded as part of the assessee’s income inasmuch as it has not been deducted in computing

NAUGHTYS PET SANCTUARY,KERALA vs. CIT( EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)

11 and 12 of theAct, to the income derived by a trust / charitable institution. Theonus lies on the Revenue to bring on record cogent material /evidence to establish that the trust / charitable institution is hitby the provisions of section 13. 7.4 Further We are of the considered opinion that any contractual compensation against servicesrendered is permissible, however any benefit paid

SANATANA DHARMA VIDYASALA,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), KOCHI, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 80G(5) of the Act. This will be the harmonious interpretation. 11. If we agree with the interpretation of the ld.CIT(E), then say a trust which was formed in the year 2000, performed charitable

SANATANA DHARMA EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL SOCIETY,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), KOCHI, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 80G(5) of the Act. This will be the harmonious interpretation. 11. If we agree with the interpretation of the ld.CIT(E), then say a trust which was formed in the year 2000, performed charitable

GOOD KARMA FOUNDATION,KULAYETTIKKARA PO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), ERNAKULAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands party allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Good Karma Foundation .......... Appellant Kulayettikkara P.O., Ernakulam 682315 [Pan: Aabtg6511D] Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) , Kochi........ Respondent Appellant By: Shri Radesh Bhatt, Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 10.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Kochi Dated 24.12.2024 Denying Grant Of Approval U/S. 80G Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter "The Act").

charitable trust cannot invest in immovable property. It is further submitted that provisions of section 11(5) of the Act provide

GAJANANA CHARITABLE TRUST,KANHANGAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Gajanana Charitable Trust Cit (Exemption) 2Nd/686, Gajanana Aayakar Bhaval Opp. Head Post Office Vs. Old Rly Station Road Hosdurg, Kanhangad 671315 Ernakulam 682018 [Pan: Aabtg6555F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 80G(5) of the Act. This will be the harmonious interpretation. 11. If we agree with the interpretation of the ld.CIT(E), then say a trust which was formed in the year 2000, performed charitable

MONKOMBU AUNDI IYER EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,IDUKKI vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, KOCHI, KOCHI

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

11(5) read with section 13(1)(d); No clause confirming that the trust’s activities shall be carried out only in India; No clause ensuring that the income of the trust shall be utilized only for charitable

DCIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. ST JOSEPHS PROVINCE, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 13 are not applicable to religious charitable trusts. Admittedly, the appellant trust is a charitable trust registered u/s. 12A of the Act and claimed exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Exemption u/s. 11 is subject to fulfillment of conditions laid down u/s. 13(9) of the Act. Moreover, the order passed by the CIT(A) is very cryptic

DCIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. ST. JOSEPHS PROVINCE, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

section 13 are not applicable to religious charitable trusts. Admittedly, the appellant trust is a charitable trust registered u/s. 12A of the Act and claimed exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Exemption u/s. 11 is subject to fulfillment of conditions laid down u/s. 13(9) of the Act. Moreover, the order passed by the CIT(A) is very cryptic

KERALA INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUTURE DEV CORPORATION(KINFRA),TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), TRIVANDRUM

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

11 read with Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act or whether in terms of the first proviso to Section 2(15), they would become ineligible for such exemption. Thus, pithily put, the issue is as to whether its activity would be one which involves the carrying on any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business