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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

cash found from the employees of the Trust are part of capitation fees collected by the assessee. But the fact remains that the revenue did not find any document/material/evidence with the assessee, which will corroborate the allegation of collection of capitation fees from the students. Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT 25. We also notice that the presumption given

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

cash found from the employees of the Trust are part of capitation fees collected by the assessee. But the fact remains that the revenue did not find any document/material/evidence with the assessee, which will corroborate the allegation of collection of capitation fees from the students. Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT 25. We also notice that the presumption given

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

cash found from the employees of the Trust are part of capitation fees collected by the assessee. But the fact remains that the revenue did not find any document/material/evidence with the assessee, which will corroborate the allegation of collection of capitation fees from the students. Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT 25. We also notice that the presumption given

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

cash found from the employees of the Trust are part of capitation fees collected by the assessee. But the fact remains that the revenue did not find any document/material/evidence with the assessee, which will corroborate the allegation of collection of capitation fees from the students. Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT 25. We also notice that the presumption given

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

cash found from the employees of the Trust are part of capitation fees collected by the assessee. But the fact remains that the revenue did not find any document/material/evidence with the assessee, which will corroborate the allegation of collection of capitation fees from the students. Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT 25. We also notice that the presumption given

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-06, NEW DELHI vs. SANTOSH TRUST, NEW DELHI

cash deposit\nto the tune of Rs.39,83,63,741/- made during the demonetization period\nwas added in the hands of the assessee under Section 69A r.w.s 115BBE\nof the Act treating the same as unexplained money which was in turn\ndeleted by the First Appellate Authority. Hence, the instant appeal before\nus.\n4.\nThe assessee a charitable trust

KHOOBSOORAT FABRICS PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 14(3), NEW DELHI

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2017-18

Charitable Trust 10 THAT SECTION 68 OF THE ACT DOES NOT APPLY TO REVENUE TRANSACTION: Moreover, it is submitted that section 68 of the Act does not apply to revenue transaction. In other words, once a sum has already been offered as income as part of sales then such sum cannot again be taxed under section

CIT vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST

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

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

cash of 2,200/- contributed by the two founder trustees but no business undertaking as such was settled upon trust. On the basis of this distinction, the CiT (Appeals) took the view that the judgment of the Madras High Court did not apply. ITA 309/2003,417/2003,18/2004,722/2007,770/2011,1050/2011 and 1051/2011 Page5of20 )L F' 8. The aforesaid view

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAY TRUST

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

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

cash of 2,200/- contributed by the two founder trustees but no business undertaking as such was settled upon trust. On the basis of this distinction, the CiT (Appeals) took the view that the judgment of the Madras High Court did not apply. ITA 309/2003,417/2003,18/2004,722/2007,770/2011,1050/2011 and 1051/2011 Page5of20 )L F' 8. The aforesaid view

CIT vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST

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

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

cash of 2,200/- contributed by the two founder trustees but no business undertaking as such was settled upon trust. On the basis of this distinction, the CiT (Appeals) took the view that the judgment of the Madras High Court did not apply. ITA 309/2003,417/2003,18/2004,722/2007,770/2011,1050/2011 and 1051/2011 Page5of20 )L F' 8. The aforesaid view

CIT vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST

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

cash of 2,200/- contributed by the two founder trustees but no business undertaking as such was settled upon trust. On the basis of this distinction, the CiT (Appeals) took the view that the judgment of the Madras High Court did not apply. ITA 309/2003,417/2003,18/2004,722/2007,770/2011,1050/2011 and 1051/2011 Page5of20

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

cash of 2,200/- contributed by the two founder trustees but no business undertaking as such was settled upon trust. On the basis of this distinction, the CiT (Appeals) took the view that the judgment of the Madras High Court did not apply. ITA 309/2003,417/2003,18/2004,722/2007,770/2011,1050/2011 and 1051/2011 Page5of20

CIT vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST

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

cash of 2,200/- contributed by the two founder trustees but no business undertaking as such was settled upon trust. On the basis of this distinction, the CiT (Appeals) took the view that the judgment of the Madras High Court did not apply. ITA 309/2003,417/2003,18/2004,722/2007,770/2011,1050/2011 and 1051/2011 Page5of20

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

cash of `2,200/- contributed by the two founder trustees but no business undertaking as such was settled upon trust. On the basis of this distinction, the CIT (Appeals) took the view that the judgment of the Madras High Court did not apply. 2012:DHC:6899-DB ITA 309/2003,417/2003,18/2004,722/2007,770/2011,1050/2011 and 1051/2011 Page

ACIT, MEERUT vs. M/S. SPACE AGE RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST, MEERUT

In the result Ground No. 1 and 3 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed and ground No

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Space Age Research & Vs. Circle-2, Meerut Technology Foundation, Charitable Trust, Railway Road, Meerut Pan: Aabts7321M (Appellant) (Respondent)

cash accruals is available with the unsecured loan creditors and how they are maintaining themselves is also net clear. Actually they all are name lender and trust is diverting the trust found for the benefit of persons specified under section 13(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961". From the above observations of the AO, it is evident that without

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

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

deposited after the 30th day of November, 1983;\n(iii)\nor\nProvided that nothing in this clause shall apply in relation to\nExplanation.—For the purposes of sub-clause (ii) of clause (c), in determining\nwhether any part of the income or any property of any trust or institution is during\nthe previous year used or applied, directly or indirectly

SHREE SEO CHAND DHARMARTH SANSTHAN,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

cash balance of the trust. The CIT (E) after going through the reply of trustees dt.26/09/2019 rejected the registration application on different ground i.e. "That the rental income earned from the shops are not charitable in nature as the surplus is not being used towards other objects of the trust but deposited

SHREE SEO CHAND DHARMARTH SANSTHAN,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

cash balance of the trust. The CIT (E) after going through the reply of trustees dt.26/09/2019 rejected the registration application on different ground i.e. "That the rental income earned from the shops are not charitable in nature as the surplus is not being used towards other objects of the trust but deposited

SHRI BABA BALAKPURI DHARMARTH AUSHDHALAYA ANF TRUST,ROHTAK vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

Accordingly, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

trust Rs 66,400/-. So in the balance sheet ambulance value has been shown at Rs 66,400/- . Ambulance being used for charitable purpose for providing services to the needy patients in time. That Income and expenditure both for the running of Ambulance has been accounted for and duly shown in Receipt & payment accounts. Further cash deposit