DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

trust to accept alleged cash loans and pay interest out of books. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in confirming the aforesaid addition(s) because the aforesaid additions are totally erroneous, unfounded and based Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

trust to accept alleged cash loans and pay interest out of books. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in confirming the aforesaid addition(s) because the aforesaid additions are totally erroneous, unfounded and based Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable

SARASWATHI AMMAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRE CIRCLE II, NOIDA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

trust to accept alleged cash loans and pay interest out of books. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in confirming the aforesaid addition(s) because the aforesaid additions are totally erroneous, unfounded and based Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

trust to accept alleged cash loans and pay interest out of books. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in confirming the aforesaid addition(s) because the aforesaid additions are totally erroneous, unfounded and based Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

trust to accept alleged cash loans and pay interest out of books. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in confirming the aforesaid addition(s) because the aforesaid additions are totally erroneous, unfounded and based Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable

ARTIFICIAL LIMBS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION OF INDIA,KANPUR vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,EXEMPTION RANGE , GHAZIABAD

In the result, we are inclined to accept the findings of Ld CIT(A) and AO

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember

charitable-trust would qualify as income for computing statutorily allowed accumulation of 15% in terms of section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. In view of the above the addition

ARTIFICIAL LIMBS MANUFACTURING CORPORATION OF INDIA,KANPUR vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,EXEMOPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD , GHAZIABAD

In the result, we are inclined to accept the findings of Ld CIT(A) and AO

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember

charitable-trust would qualify as income for computing statutorily allowed accumulation of 15% in terms of section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. In view of the above the addition

BHAGWANT SINGH CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

Additional Director rejected assessee's application on grounds that assessee had entered into franchise agreements for opening schools and franchisee fee received by it from satellite schools in lieu of its name, logo and motto amounted to a 14 Bhagwant Singh Charitable Trust 'business activity' with a profit motive and no separate books of account were maintained by assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER(E) WARD- 2(4), NEW DELHI, CIVIC CENTRE NEW DELHI vs. PRAKASH SEWA TRUST, PASCHIM VIHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

charitable trust is application of income.\nAccordingly, the action of the AO in denial of exemption u/s 11 and resultantly\nbringing an amount of Rs.2,60,00,000/- to tax is not sustainable and hence\ncannot be upheld. Therefore, the AO is directed to delete the addition

DCIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S SPIRITUAL REGENERATION MOVEMENT FOUNDATION OF INDIA,, NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2011-12

Income Tax Act, 1961 vide order dated 17.09.1977 and has been found to be eligible for benefit of section 11 of the Act. 5. The first quarrel is in respect of the claim of depreciation on fixed assets which according to the revenue tantamount to double deduction as the expenditure on fixed assets is already allowed. 6. This issue

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. M/S INDRAPRASTHA CANCER SOCIETY

Charitable Trust, wherein it has been held:- “30. So far as the claim of depreciation is concerned the decision of the Tribunal cannot be countenanced. The Tribunal has overlooked that the cost of the assets has already been allowed as a deduction as application of income, as held by the CIT (Appeals) as well as the assessing officer

M/S GIAN SAGAR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. Gian Sagar Educational Vs. Dcit & Charitable Trust, Central Circle-29, Sco 10-110, Sector 43B, New Delhi Chandigarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaatg5827B

Income Tax Act. (Addition Rs. 15,60,77,000/-)” 10. Further, from the relevant part of first appellate order we note that the ld CIT(A) granted part relief to the assessee and confirmation remaining part of addition amounting to Rs. M/s. Gian Sagar Educational and Charitable Trust

MOOL CHAND KHAIRATI RAM TRUST vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)

The appeal is disposed of

Charitable Trust, has preferred the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the ‘Act’) impugning the order dated 3rd February, 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereafter the ‘Tribunal’) in ITA No. 5681/DEL/2010. 2. By the impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue assailing the order of the Commissioner

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAY TRUST

Inasmuch as all that is required is for the settler of the trust to declare that the

additional reference to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Thanthi Trust (supra). 15. Section 11(1) of the Act grants exemption to the income derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. M/S BAGRI FOUNDATION

charitable or religious purpose and it will also get exempted from the tax net. Then follows Sub-section (2) which seeks to lift the restriction or the ceiling imposed on such exempted accumulated income during the previous year and also brings such further accumulated income out of the tax net if the conditions laid down by Sub-section

RICHMOND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Charitable Trust and Institutions\nIncome of any fund or institution or trust or any university or other educational\ninstitution or any hospital or other medical institution referred to in sub-clause (iv)\nor sub-clause (v) or ub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10\nor any trust or institution registered u/s 12AA or 12AB

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. INDIAN TRADE PROMOTION ORGANISATION

charitable institutions. The legal interpretation which has continued since 1984, if disturbed and implemented, would not appropriately resolved. Consistency and certainty is more appropriate. . 16. The equally plausible and consistent interpretation of clause (a) of Section 11(1) of the Act is that income derived from property must be calculated as per the principles of the Act. The said clause

SALWAN EDUCATION TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, EXMP 2(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Salwan Education Trust, Dcit, Salwan Schools Campus, Pt Exemption 2(1), Girdhari Lal Salwan Marg, Vs Delhi, Rajinder Nagar, 24Th Floor, Civic Centre, New Delhi-110060, New Delhi-110002. Pan- Aacts9741A Assessee Revenue

income) - Assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 - High Court by impugned order held that as long as objects of trust were charitable in character and purpose or purposes mentioned in Form No. 15 ITA No.- 5275/Del/2024 Salwan Educa"on Trust 10 were for achieving objects of trust, merely because details were not furnished, assessee could not be denied benefit

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. CHARANJIV CHARITABLE TRUST

In the result both aspects of the first substantial question of law

Bench: It, Two By The Assessee Relating To The Assessment Years 2006-07 & 2007-08 & One By The Revenue Relating To The Assessment Year 2006-07. In Other Words, In Respect Of The Assessment Year 2006-07, There Were Cross- 2014:Dhc:1467-Db

charitable purposes, except those contributions which are made with a specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus of the trust. The effect of Section 12(1) is that non-corpus donations which are treated as income derived from property held under trust will have to be subjected to the provisions of Section 13. Corpus donations, however, will