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

35. In the present case, Sh. V. Mathiyalgan who was the Vice Chancellor of SIMS and was one of the paid employee of Assessee trust during the relevant point of time and the said SIMS is one of the Units of the Assessee Trust. Since the SIMS comes under the umbrella of Assessee Trust, relationship between the Assessee

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

35. In the present case, Sh. V. Mathiyalgan who was the Vice Chancellor of SIMS and was one of the paid employee of Assessee trust during the relevant point of time and the said SIMS is one of the Units of the Assessee Trust. Since the SIMS comes under the umbrella of Assessee Trust, relationship between the Assessee

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

35. In the present case, Sh. V. Mathiyalgan who was the Vice Chancellor of SIMS and was one of the paid employee of Assessee trust during the relevant point of time and the said SIMS is one of the Units of the Assessee Trust. Since the SIMS comes under the umbrella of Assessee Trust, relationship between the Assessee

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

35. In the present case, Sh. V. Mathiyalgan who was the Vice Chancellor of SIMS and was one of the paid employee of Assessee trust during the relevant point of time and the said SIMS is one of the Units of the Assessee Trust. Since the SIMS comes under the umbrella of Assessee Trust, relationship between the Assessee

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

35. In the present case, Sh. V. Mathiyalgan who was the Vice Chancellor of SIMS and was one of the paid employee of Assessee trust during the relevant point of time and the said SIMS is one of the Units of the Assessee Trust. Since the SIMS comes under the umbrella of Assessee Trust, relationship between the Assessee

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JAMNALAL BAJAJ FOUNDATION

35,000 if not invested as per sub-section (2) of Section 11 will be added to the taxable income of the trust and will not get exempted from the tax net. (v) If on the other hand the entire remaining accumulated income of Rs 55,000 is wholly invested as per Section 11(2) the said entire amount

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JAMNALAL BAJAJ FOUNDATION

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

35,000 if not invested as per sub-section (2) of Section 11 will be added to the taxable income of the trust and will not get exempted from the tax net. (v) If on the other hand the entire remaining accumulated income of Rs 55,000 is wholly invested as per Section 11(2) the said entire amount

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. ANIKA INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

10(23C) which, it is well settled, is a provision closely interlinked to Section 80-G. Where the two expressions "charitable purpose" and "not for purposes of profit" are used in the same statute, in cognate provisions, even if situated at some distance from each other, they cannot be accorded the same meaning, without due justification. In the present case

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPT vs. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

trusts of The Delhi Public School Society, DPS Staff Flats, F Block, East of Kailash, New Delhi. Though there is no possibility of the dissolution of the society, however, in the event of dissolution, the funds will be given to charitable organization(s) with similar objective and no part of the same will be distributed to any of the trustees

SUNSHINE EDUCATIONAL & DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, EXEMPTION, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla

35,600 1,000 3,600 7 25,200 29,000 12 1,100 12 29 3,82,800 1,000 3,600 5 18,000 TOTAL 80,14,800 9,99,000 6,73,200 LATE FINE 2,65,095 FEES 27,750 30,500 B/S 82,79,895 B/S 7,00,950 10

GIAN SAGAR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-27, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 6054/Del./2018 : Asstt. Year : Gian Sagar Educational & Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Charitable Trust, Flat No. 509, Tax, Central Circle-27, 5Th Floor, Indraprakash Building, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg5827B Assessee By : Sh. Amol Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Sunita Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.09.2020

10 Gian Sagar Educational & Charitable Trust cancellation of the registration of the assessee trust by the Pr. CIT is wholly unsustainable in law. It was submitted that u/s 12AA(3) of the Act, registration can be cancelled only when the Principal Commissioner is satisfied that activities of such trust or institution are not genuine or are not being carried

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

The appeal is disposed of

trust is registered under Section 12A of the Act, exemption under Section 11 and Section 12 of the Act would necessarily follow. The provisions of Section 12 of the Act do not curtail or in any manner dilute the mandatory requirements of Section 11 of the Act. Thus, notwithstanding that an Assessee has been granted a registration under Section

CONFRERE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

35,600 25,200 33,000 1000 3,600 5 12 1,100 12 29 3,82,800 18,000 29,000 TOTAL 80,14,800 6,73,200 9,99,000 FINE 2,65,095 27,750 30,500 4,70,900 1,04,81, 245 B/S 82,79,895 7,00,950 10,29,500 ITA Nos.4464 & 4463/Del/2017

PATANJALI YOGPEETH (NYAS),DELHI vs. ADIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

Trust (for Rs. 38,35,00,000 construction of Patanjali Yogpeeth-II) (b) Donations in relation to Disaster Relief Fund Rs. 4,36,23,766 (b) Donations in University of Patanjali Rs. 61,000 Total Rs. 42,71,84,766 10. That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in holding that the voluntary contribution

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

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

35 years) which has remained throughout undoubted and is fully accepted /operative and once the subject immovable property purchase in hands of trust is fully accepted in past/previous year(s) from 1995 (for more than 20 years), and assessee "charitable" status is also fully accepted in past, to hold in present /instant sale year that entire exemption

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. FORTUNE SOCIETY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiadit(E), Vs. Fortune Society For Tc-Ii, New Delhi Development & Promotion Of International Business, G-4, Community Centre, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi Pan:Aaatf0849L (Appellant) (Respondent)

trust wholly for charitable and religious purposes. 'Charitable purposes’ is defined in terms of section 2(15) of the Act to mean relief of the poor, education, medical relief and the advancement of any other object of general public utility. The clause has been modified over the years such that in its present form, it includes within its ambit yoga

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

10-110, Sector 43B, New Delhi Chandigarh (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN:AAATG5827B Assessee by : Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, Adv Revenue by: Md. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT DR Date of final Hearing 23/08/2023 Date of pronouncement 19/10/2023 O R D E R PER C. M. GARG, J. M.: 1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order

DCIT (EXEMPTION), UTTAR PRADESH vs. M/S. DIVYA YOG MANDIR TRUST, HARIDWAR

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

35 (Del.) vi) CIT Vs HPS Social Welfare Foundation 235 CTR 330 (Del.) …………….. 6.6.4. Further allegation of Ld. CIT(DR) remained that the appellant has applied minimum amount of income for charitable purpose and diverted substantial amount to its sister concern i.e. Patanjali Yogpeeth Trust with the intention of retaining funds within its own control. It was alleged