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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

sections 69A and 69C, as the provisions of Chapter VI "Aggregation of income and set-off or carry-forward of loss" are not applicable in the case of a charitable trust, viz. the appellant Trust. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the appellate proceedings got totally vitiated as the remand report was not provided

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

sections 69A and 69C, as the provisions of Chapter VI "Aggregation of income and set-off or carry-forward of loss" are not applicable in the case of a charitable trust, viz. the appellant Trust. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the appellate proceedings got totally vitiated as the remand report was not provided

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

sections 69A and 69C, as the provisions of Chapter VI "Aggregation of income and set-off or carry-forward of loss" are not applicable in the case of a charitable trust, viz. the appellant Trust. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the appellate proceedings got totally vitiated as the remand report was not provided

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

sections 69A and 69C, as the provisions of Chapter VI "Aggregation of income and set-off or carry-forward of loss" are not applicable in the case of a charitable trust, viz. the appellant Trust. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the appellate proceedings got totally vitiated as the remand report was not provided

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

sections 69A and 69C, as the provisions of Chapter VI "Aggregation of income and set-off or carry-forward of loss" are not applicable in the case of a charitable trust, viz. the appellant Trust. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the appellate proceedings got totally vitiated as the remand report was not provided

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

142(1) along with questionnaire was issued. In compliance thereto Mr. M.A. Gohel, FCA and Mr. Parag Bhatia, Honorary Accountant, Authorized Representatives, attended the assessment proceeding from time to time. Filed information/document as called for. Books of accounts along with bills/vouchers regarding expenditures incurred sand evidence for having earned the income form different heads, have been produced which have been

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

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

142(1) along with questionnaire was issued. In compliance thereto Mr. M.A. Gohel, FCA and Mr. Parag Bhatia, Honorary Accountant, Authorized Representatives, attended the assessment proceeding from time to time. Filed information/document as called for. Books of accounts along with bills/vouchers regarding expenditures incurred sand evidence for having earned the income form different heads, have been produced which have been

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

trust vis a vis subject\ndonations made to recipient \"registered\" charitable organizations.\n9. ON DEMURRER TOTAL LACK OF SCN INVALIDAT THE IMPUGNED\nASST: As evident from cursory look to impugned asst order dated 30.12.2018\npassed u/s 143(3) merely after notice u/s 142 11.10.2018 & 15.12.2018\nimpugned Asstt. is framed without any SCN (show cause notice) much less valid\nSCN being

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

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. ASHOK LOGANI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Trust Circle-II and the case was adjourned to 26"' November, 2008. In terms of notice dated 18"' November, 2008, reply to the questionnaire was filed on 26"' November, 2008 and on the said date the books of accounts were produced. However, they were never opened and no specific query was raised on any entry in the books of accounts

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 Trust which was granted registration under section 12A of the Act on 28.05.1976. In respect of the assessment year 2006-07, it filed a return of income declaring Rs.Nil as its income. On 31.10.2006 this return was processed under Section 143(1). Subsequently a scrutiny of the return was initiated and notices under Sections 142

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 reported in (1995) 216 ITR 697 (SC); (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax V s. Programme for Community Organization reported in (2001) 248 ITR 1 (SC); (iv) Society of the Servants of the Holy Spirit Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) - ITA No. 975/Bang/2015 (ITAT Bangalore); and (v) DCIT Vs. Rashtrothana Parishat - ITA No. 896 & 897/Bang/2014 (ITAT Bangalore

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 reported in (1995) 216 ITR 697 (SC); (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax V s. Programme for Community Organization reported in (2001) 248 ITR 1 (SC); (iv) Society of the Servants of the Holy Spirit Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) - ITA No. 975/Bang/2015 (ITAT Bangalore); and (v) DCIT Vs. Rashtrothana Parishat - ITA No. 896 & 897/Bang/2014 (ITAT Bangalore

M/S. MANJEET KAUR MEMORIAL PREMIER INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION,GURGAON vs. ITO, GURGAON

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

section 11 is the real income and not the income as assessed or assessable. Accordingly, while arriving at the rental income of the assessee-trust any expenditure incurred whatsoever related to the rental income has to be allowed as deduction and the net income which is the real income, will be treated as the income of the Trust. From

M/S. MANJIT KAUR MEMORIAL PREMIER INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GURGAON

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

section 11 is the real income and not the income as assessed or assessable. Accordingly, while arriving at the rental income of the assessee-trust any expenditure incurred whatsoever related to the rental income has to be allowed as deduction and the net income which is the real income, will be treated as the income of the Trust. From

DEVKI DEVI FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. DIT (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: -- Devki Devi Foundation, Vs Dit (Exemptions), Plot No.15, 3Rd Floor, 2, Press Enclave Road, Saket, Aayakar Bhawan, New Delhi. Laxmi Nagar District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aaatd5283G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate & Shri Deepesh Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms Nidhi Srivastava, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.10.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2011 Of The Dit (Exemptions), Delhi Withdrawing Registration Granted Earlier U/S 12A Of The It Act Since Inception.

section:- • Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority vs. ADIT(E): 58 SOT 196 (Mum.) • Urmila Devi Charitable Trust v. CIT(E): ITA No.4136/Del/2017 (Del Trib.) • Project Management Institute v. DIT(E): 142

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

142(1) dated 17.10.2019. Pursuant to the said notice the\nassessee duly submitted the details as required. The assessee filed\nreturn of income reporting cash deposit to the tune of Rs.39,83,63,741/-\nduring demonetization period commencing from 09.11.2016 to\n31.12.2016. Show cause as to whether such cash deposit shall not be\nconsidered as undisclosed income of the assessee

G D EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. JCIT, RANGE- 1, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

142(1) dated 25/10/2011 was issued and served upon the assessee fixing the date of hearing on 11/11/2011 was issued and served upon the assessee. In response to all the statutory notices, Chartered Accountant and Authorized Representative appeared for and on behalf of the assessee from time to time and furnished details and documents as called for by the Assessing

G D EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. JCIT, RANGE- 1, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

142(1) dated 25/10/2011 was issued and served upon the assessee fixing the date of hearing on 11/11/2011 was issued and served upon the assessee. In response to all the statutory notices, Chartered Accountant and Authorized Representative appeared for and on behalf of the assessee from time to time and furnished details and documents as called for by the Assessing