BHAGWANT SINGH CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

Charitable purpose (Proviso to section 2(15) Assessment years 2010-11 & 2012-13 - Whether newly inserted proviso to section 2(15) will not apply in respect of first three limbs of section 2(15), i.e., relief of poor, education or medical relief, and consequently, where purpose of a trust

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

Charitable Trust ready reference, the provisions of Section 2(15) of the Act are reproduced as under: “Section 2………. (15

NIIT FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyniit Foundation, Vs. Cit(E), Plot No. 8, Balaji Estate, New Delhi Sudarshan Munjal Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi Pan: Aacan3951E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Charitable & Educational Trust vs. Commissioner of lncome-tax-1, Cochin-1 [2014] 62 SOT 126 (Cochin - Trib.)(URO) Where assessee-trust was conducting a study centre for Karnataka Open University, it could not be considered to be an educational institution within meaning of section 2(15

ITO (E), DELHI vs. SUVASINI CHARITABLE TRUST,, DELHI

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm Ita No. 4330/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Income Tax Officer(E), Vs Suvasini Charitable Trust, Trust Ward-Ii, Swaminarayan Akshardham Delhi Mandir, Nh-24, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafts6497L Assessee By : Sh. K. P. Garg, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Anima Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

Trust "Subject - Definition of 'Charitable purpose ' under section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 -reg. Section 2(15

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

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

sections 11, 12A and 12A(a) of the Act. AO held the activities of the assessee trust not covered u/s 2(15) of the Act and declined the exemption u/s 11 of the Act. AO taxed the total income at Rs.52,76,05,600/- on the ground that the activities of the trust are not of charitable

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged to assessee trust. Therefore, as per Section 292C/134(4) and Section 132(4A) of the Act, presumption should have been drawn against the said

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 hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged to assessee trust. Therefore, as per Section 292C/134(4) and Section 132(4A) of the Act, presumption should have been drawn against the said

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 hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged to assessee trust. Therefore, as per Section 292C/134(4) and Section 132(4A) of the Act, presumption should have been drawn against the said

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 hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged to assessee trust. Therefore, as per Section 292C/134(4) and Section 132(4A) of the Act, presumption should have been drawn against the said

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged to assessee trust. Therefore, as per Section 292C/134(4) and Section 132(4A) of the Act, presumption should have been drawn against the said

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged to assessee trust. Therefore, as per Section 292C/134(4) and Section 132(4A) of the Act, presumption should have been drawn against the said

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

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

trust property for charitable or religious purposes or set apart not more than 15% of that income for charitable or religious purposes. Once an accumulation to the extent of 15% of that income is made, the provisions of Section

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

trust property for charitable or religious purposes or set apart not more than 15% of that income for charitable or religious purposes. Once an accumulation to the extent of 15% of that income is made, the provisions of Section

ACIT (EXEMPTION), GHAZIABAD vs. M/S. DIVYA YOG MANDIR TRUST,, HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishia Y 2010-11 Acit (Exemption) Vs Divya Yog Mandir Trust Circle, Cgo-1 Kripalu Bag, Hapur Road, Kankhal, Haridwar Ghaziabad (Pan Aaatd1114E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

charitable trust. Likewise the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rajneesh Foundation (supra) is not relevant as the said decision was rendered prior to introduction of proviso to section 2 (15

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

section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act. The counsel for the respondent argued that appeal is liable to be dismissed. 14. It is reflecting from the record that union which submitted representation on 23.07.1999 to the appellant Hospital was the Batra Hospital & Medical Research Centre of Ch. Aishi Ram Batra Charitable Trust

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

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit(Exemptions), Divya Yog Mandir Trust, Room No. 105, 1St Floor, Kripalu Bagh, Cgo-Ii, Vs Kankhal, Kamla Nehru Nagar, Haridwar. Ghaziabad. (Pan: Aaatd1114E) Appellant Respondent Department By: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, C.I.T. Dr Assessee By: Shri Rohti Jain, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2019 O R D E R

charitable trust. Likewise the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rajneesh Foundation (supra) is not relevant as the said decision was rendered prior to introduction of proviso to section 2 (15

DDIT (E), DELHI vs. M/S. ALL INDIA FOOTBALL FEDERATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Smt. Beena Pillai

charitable purpose is contained in section 2(15) of the Act. The activities under taken by the trust are undisputedly

INDIAN INTERNATIONAL CENTRE,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11 India International Centre, Vs. Cit (E), 40, Max Muller Marg, Room No.2620, Lodhi Estate, Civic Centre, New Delhi. Jl Nehru Marg, New Delhi. Pan: Aaati0660C

trust in AY 2009-10, Explanation along with documentary proof to justify that these activities were charitable as per Section 11,12,13 read with Section 2(15