ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

RONALD EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. DCIT, BERHAMPUR CIRCLE, BERHAMPUR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,GANJAM vs. CHEIF CIT, BHUBANESWAR

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

trust as it does not come within the meaning of 'charitable purposes' as per the provisions of Section 2(15) of the :- 40

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

charitable purpose the aggregate sum of Rs. 1.70.369. Leaving a balance of Rs. 87,910. The question is whether the assessee is entitled to accumulate twenty five percent of Rs. 2.57,376 contends, or twenty five percent of Rs. 87,010 as the revenue appeared to contend. 2. Considering the facts of the case and ratio laid down

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

charitable purpose the aggregate sum of Rs. 1.70.369. Leaving a balance of Rs. 87,910. The question is whether the assessee is entitled to accumulate twenty five percent of Rs. 2.57,376 contends, or twenty five percent of Rs. 87,010 as the revenue appeared to contend. 2. Considering the facts of the case and ratio laid down

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

charitable purpose the aggregate sum of Rs. 1.70.369. Leaving a balance of Rs. 87,910. The question is whether the assessee is entitled to accumulate twenty five percent of Rs. 2.57,376 contends, or twenty five percent of Rs. 87,010 as the revenue appeared to contend. 2. Considering the facts of the case and ratio laid down

MAA JAGAT JANANI SEVA TRUST,NAMBIRA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2023-24 Maa Maa Jagat Jagat Janani Janani Seva Seva Vs. Cit (E), Hyderabad Cit (E), Hyderabad Trust, At- -Nambira, Po: Bamebari, Ps: Joda, Dist: Bamebari, Ps: Joda, Dist: Keonjhar Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aadtm 1575 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16/0 07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 16/0 /07/2024

charitable purpose created or established after the commencement of this Act, has applied any part of its income for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste; or e) Any activity being carried out by the trust or institution— (i) is not genuine, or (ii) is not being carried out in accordance with all or any of the conditions

JOHARIMAL HIGH SCHOOL,CUTTACK vs. ITO EXEMPTION, CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/ S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2018-19 Joharimal High School, Joharimal High School, Vs. Ito (Exemptions), Ito (Exemptions), Ganesh Ganesh Ghat, Ghat, Po: Po: Cuttack Chandinchowk, Cuttack Chandinchowk, Cuttack Pan/Gir No. No.Aaatj 3292 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra & R.K.Jhunjhunwala P.K.Mishra & R.K.Jhunjhunwala, Ars Revenue By : Shri Sovesh Chandra Mohanty, Chandra Mohanty, (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 2/3/ 20 / 2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/ /3/2022 O R D E R Per C.M.Garg G, Jm

charitable trust running a school since 1982. The assessee trust filed its return of income on 27.10.2018 showing an income of Rs.18,12,685/- being interest from bank and I.T.return, thereby claiming exemption of Rs.24,30,289/- u/s.10(23c)(iiad) i.e. excess of gross receipts of Rs.97,40,810/- over expenditure of Rs.73,10,521/-. The Assessing Officer processed

STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ODISHA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARAD 5(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed and stay petition stands dismissed

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwals.P.No.11/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year :2017-18 State Pollution Control Board State Pollution Control Board, Vs. Ito, Ward 5(2), Plot No.A-118, Paribesh Bhawan, 118, Paribesh Bhawan, Bhubaneswar Nilakantha Nagar, Agar, Nayapali, Nayapali, Unit-Vii, Bhubaneswar Neswar Pan/Gir No.Aaals 2490 J Aaals 2490 J (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ca Walla, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/10/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/10/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

Trust or Commission (by whatever name called) will require similar consideration – i.e., whether it is at cost with a nominal mark- up or significantly higher, to determine if it falls within the mischief of “commercial activity”. However, in the case of such notified bodies, there is no quantified limit in Section 10(46). Therefore, the Central Government would have