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

133(1A)and 132(4) of the Act, though nowhere in such statement fact of returning the amount/capitation fee collected by Sh. V. Mathiyalgan to the Assessee was stated. In our considered opinion, the said statement of the C.A. of the Assessee is self- Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT declaration and contradictory to the statement made

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

133(1A)and 132(4) of the Act, though nowhere in such statement fact of returning the amount/capitation fee collected by Sh. V. Mathiyalgan to the Assessee was stated. In our considered opinion, the said statement of the C.A. of the Assessee is self- Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT declaration and contradictory to the statement made

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

133(1A)and 132(4) of the Act, though nowhere in such statement fact of returning the amount/capitation fee collected by Sh. V. Mathiyalgan to the Assessee was stated. In our considered opinion, the said statement of the C.A. of the Assessee is self- Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT declaration and contradictory to the statement made

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

133(1A)and 132(4) of the Act, though nowhere in such statement fact of returning the amount/capitation fee collected by Sh. V. Mathiyalgan to the Assessee was stated. In our considered opinion, the said statement of the C.A. of the Assessee is self- Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT declaration and contradictory to the statement made

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

133(1A)and 132(4) of the Act, though nowhere in such statement fact of returning the amount/capitation fee collected by Sh. V. Mathiyalgan to the Assessee was stated. In our considered opinion, the said statement of the C.A. of the Assessee is self- Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT declaration and contradictory to the statement made

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

Charitable Trust 5. That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that mere non-receipt of response to notice issued under section 133(6

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

6; Hon'ble Rajasthan high court in case of Indian Medical Trust\nvs PCIT (2019) 414 ITR 296: (2019) 311 CTR 19: Third Member Allahabad\nITAT decision in case of JEEWAN JYOTI CHARITABLE TRUST VS PCIT\nCENTRAL ITA No. 73/ALLD/2019 20.05.2022-weight of special bench decision;\nDelhi G bench ITAT decision in case of URMILA DEVI CHARITABLE TRUST\nITA_4136/DEL/2017

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

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

6. The first issue to be decided is whether the ld. CIT (A) has erred in partly allowing the claim of the assessee ignoring the fact that major activities as claimed by the assessee trust is its inter-trust 4 ITA No.5612/Del./2015 donation of Rs.68.78 crores out of the total income of Rs.144.88 7. This issue has been decided

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

Appeal is allowed

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

section 142(2A) while confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in denying exemption under sections 11/12 of the Act. 8.2 The ld. AR on queries raised by the Bench responded that assessee trust is not running shops or distribution of products and for those shoppings and distribution and selling of products, as on commercial basis different entity is there

M/S. MUSSOORIE DEHRADUN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,DEHRADUN vs. CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result we dismiss the appeal of the assessee

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year:

6. The meaning of the words "not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit" added in s. 2(15) of the 1961 Act is that when the purpose of a trust or institution is the advancement of an object of general public utility it is that object of general public utility and not its accomplishment which must

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 133(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961 appeared before him and stated that during the relevant period it did not make any transaction with the assessee-trust and no payment was made to the assessee-trust on any account. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that since the name and address of the donor was 16 ITA.No.4775 & 4692/Del./2015

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 133(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961 appeared before him and stated that during the relevant period it did not make any transaction with the assessee-trust and no payment was made to the assessee-trust on any account. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that since the name and address of the donor was 16 ITA.No.4775 & 4692/Del./2015

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

133(6) calling for information but there was no compliance. He, therefore, added both the corpus donations under Section 68. The assessing officer also disallowed depreciation on certain assets on the ground that the cost of those assets was allowed as application of the income of the trust for charitable

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. NIDHI SHARMA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

charitable objectives and due to the same, the trust had suffered losses to the tune of around more than Rs. 20 Crores. Therefore the circumstances indicate that, the trust needed actual money to run the hospital smoothly in view of the mounting losses and not mere accommodation entries. There is force in the argument of the AR that the circumstantial

AIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. ANKIT SHARMA, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

charitable objectives and due to the same, the trust had suffered losses to the tune of around more than Rs. 20 Crores. Therefore the circumstances indicate that, the trust needed actual money to run the hospital smoothly in view of the mounting losses and not mere accommodation entries. There is force in the argument of the AR that the circumstantial

ANKIT SHARMA,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

charitable objectives and due to the same, the trust had suffered losses to the tune of around more than Rs. 20 Crores. Therefore the circumstances indicate that, the trust needed actual money to run the hospital smoothly in view of the mounting losses and not mere accommodation entries. There is force in the argument of the AR that the circumstantial

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. JAIPAL SINGH SHARMA TRUST, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

charitable objectives and due to the same, the trust had suffered losses to the tune of around more than Rs. 20 Crores. Therefore the circumstances indicate that, the trust needed actual money to run the hospital smoothly in view of the mounting losses and not mere accommodation entries. There is force in the argument of the AR that the circumstantial

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. JAIPAL SINGH SHARMA TRUST, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

charitable objectives and due to the same, the trust had suffered losses to the tune of around more than Rs. 20 Crores. Therefore the circumstances indicate that, the trust needed actual money to run the hospital smoothly in view of the mounting losses and not mere accommodation entries. There is force in the argument of the AR that the circumstantial

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)

charitable or religious institution, any income thereof, if for any period during the previous year- (i) any funds of the trust or institution are invested or deposited after the 28th day of February, 1983, otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11 ; or (ii) any funds