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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said act of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan. 39. We have also gone through the statements given of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan recorded under Section 131

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

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said act of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan. 39. We have also gone through the statements given of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan recorded under Section 131

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said act of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan. 39. We have also gone through the statements given of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan recorded under Section 131

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said act of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan. 39. We have also gone through the statements given of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan recorded under Section 131

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

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

131, it is stated as follows:\n\"When a charity has been founded and trusts have been declared the founder\nhas no power to revoke, vary or add to the trusts. This is so irrespective of\nwhether the trusts have been declared by an individual, or by a body of\nsubscribers, or by the trustees.\"\nWhen the founders

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

Section 61. Generally a person has to get rid of the asset itself before ceasing to be assessable in respect of the income from that asset. A mere direction that the income from the business shall be applied to the charitable objects of a trust, without there being a settlement of the business itself upon trust, does not result

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

Section 61. Generally a person has to get rid of the asset itself before ceasing to be assessable in respect of the income from that asset. A mere direction that the income from the business shall be applied to the charitable objects of a trust, without there being a settlement of the business itself upon trust, does not result

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

Section 61. Generally a person has to get rid of the asset itself before ceasing to be assessable in respect of the income from that asset. A mere direction that the income from the business shall be applied to the charitable objects of a trust, without there being a settlement of the business itself upon trust, does not result

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

Section 61. Generally a person has to get rid of the asset itself before ceasing to be assessable in respect of the income from that asset. A mere direction that the income from the business shall be applied to the charitable objects of a trust, without there being a settlement of the business itself upon trust, does not result

CIT vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST

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

Section 61. Generally a person has to get rid of the asset itself before ceasing to be assessable in respect of the income from that asset. A mere direction that the income from the business shall be applied to the charitable objects of a trust, without there being a settlement of the business itself upon trust, does not result

CIT vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST

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

Section 61. Generally a person has to get rid of the asset itself before ceasing to be assessable in respect of the income from that asset. A mere direction that the income from the business shall be applied to the charitable objects of a trust, without there being a settlement of the business itself upon trust, does not result

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

Appeal is allowed

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

131 Taxman 270 (Guj.); (vi) Little Tradition V. DDIT (Exemption) (2009) 119 I.T.D. 127 (ITAT) (Del.); (vii) Trustees of Kilachand Devchand Foundation Vs. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 382 (Bom,.); (viii) R. B. Shreeram Religious & Charitable Trust Vs. CIT (1998) 233 ITR 53 (SC); (ix) Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust Vs. DIT (Exemption) (2008) 171 Taxman

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

Section 61. Generally a person has to get rid of the asset itself before ceasing to be assessable in respect of the income from that asset. A mere direction that the income from the business shall be applied to the charitable objects of a trust, without there being a settlement of the business itself upon trust, does not result

GIAN SUGAR EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST (REGD.),CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, ITA.No.4692/Del

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharma

section 131 of the I.T. Act, 1961 to the alleged donars or to the Bank in view of pay orders furnished by the assessee-trust and in absence of any strong objection from the side of the Ld. D.R. for restoring the issue back to the file of A.O, we are of the view that the issue needs

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

In the result, ITA.No.4692/Del

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharma

section 131 of the I.T. Act, 1961 to the alleged donars or to the Bank in view of pay orders furnished by the assessee-trust and in absence of any strong objection from the side of the Ld. D.R. for restoring the issue back to the file of A.O, we are of the view that the issue needs

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

131 Taxman 386. In the said judgment, the contention of the Department predicated on double benefit was turned down in the following manner: "3. As stated above, the first question which requires consideration by this Court is: whether depreciation was allowable on the assets, the cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income under section

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

131 Taxman 386. In the said judgment, the contention of the Department predicated on double benefit was turned down in the following manner: "3. As stated above, the first question which requires consideration by this Court is: whether depreciation was allowable on the assets, the cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income under section

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

131 Taxman 386. In the said judgment, the contention of the Department predicated on double benefit was turned down in the following manner: "3. As stated above, the first question which requires consideration by this Court is: whether depreciation was allowable on the assets, the cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income under section