JAIN MAHASABHA DELHI,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION) DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both both appeals of the assessee are allowed for assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareekshri Sudhir Pareek

trust or institution has been provisionally registered under section 12AB[or provisionally approved registered under section 12AB[or provisionally approved registered under section 12AB[or provisionally approved under sub under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10), at least six clause

JAIN MAHASABHA DELHI,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION) DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both both appeals of the assessee are allowed for assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareekshri Sudhir Pareek

trust or institution has been provisionally registered under section 12AB[or provisionally approved registered under section 12AB[or provisionally approved registered under section 12AB[or provisionally approved under sub under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10), at least six clause

SOUTH ASIA FOUNDATION INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act were prejudice to the trusts and societies engaged in charitable activities since long

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

80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was completely disregarded. The object of the expression "charitable" in the Income Tax Act, 1961 has the same purpose as the expression "not for the purpose of profit" in section 32(v)c) of the Act. 12. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the impugned judgment has erred in holding without

PRACHEEN SHRI AGGARWAL DIGAMBER JAIN PANCHAYAT DELHI,DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed as indicated above for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

iii) to first proviso to section 80G(5) cannot be excluded and or it has not been the intention of the CBDT while issuing the circular. There cannot be a distinction within the same provision without bringing out any exception and even this is for the benefit of provision the donors who are donating money to the charitable trusts

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

Appeal is allowed

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

charitable purpose either in India or abroad, question arises as to whether the trust is entitled to tax exemption even though income utilized outside India is not of a very significant amount. 7.2 As per the terms of clause 15(1)(i) of the trust deed annual general meeting is not convened atleast once in a year. He submitted that

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

80G(5)(vi) of the Act. It had claimed exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act. Although a return for the Assessment Year4 in question, namely, AY 2009-10, had been originally filed on 30 September 2009, the respondent thereafter submitted a revised return of income on 24 March 2011. The reasons assigned for submission of the revised

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

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

80G(5)(vi) of the Act. It had claimed exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act. Although a return for the Assessment Year4 in question, namely, AY 2009-10, had been originally filed on 30 September 2009, the respondent thereafter submitted a revised return of income on 24 March 2011. The reasons assigned for submission of the revised

VAIDYA MANGAT RAI FOUNDATION,CHANDIGARH vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmavaidya Mangat Rai The Commissioner Of Foundation Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Friends Colony Chandigarh Gali No.2, Hansi Road Bhiwani. Pan-Aadtv 6078Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Sapna Bhattia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 25/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/04/2024

Trust [A] charitable activity may apply first for the ‘Provisional Registration ‘under the Act. After getting the Provisional Registration the Trust/Institution have to apply for Regular registration. These kind of Trust/Institutes will fall under sub clause (iii) of the Proviso to Section 80G(5

JUST BE FOUNDATION TRUST ,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshram/S Just Be Foundation Commissioner Of Income Trust Flat No. 01, Yamuna Vs Tax (Exemptions), E-2, Apartments, Alaknanda, Civic Centre, New Delhi New Delhi-110019

80G(5) of I.T. Act are also reproduced as under:- (5) This section applies to donations to any institution or fund referred to in sub-clause (iv) of clause (a) of sub-section (2), only if it is established in India for a charitable purpose and if it fulfills the following conditions, namely :— (i) where the institution or fund derives

FOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF MICRO ENTERPRISES,GURUGRAM vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statical purpose

Bench: Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhvs. Cit(Exemptions), Foundation For Advancement Of Micro Chandigarh Enterprises, Unit No. 701 To 711, 7Th Floor, Unitech Commercial, Tower 2, Sector-45, Gurugram, Haryana- 122003 Pan :Aadcf6999F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suresh Wadhwa, Fca Department By Shri Surender Pal, Cit, Dr

Charitable Trust (supra). The concluding paragraph of the judgment is worth to note in this aspect, which read as under :— "Be that as it may, we are here concerned whether in the absence of any statutory provision to condone the delay in 4 presenting the application under section 10(23C)(vi), the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax can exercise

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

80G of the Act vide F. NO. CIT- II/CHD/80G/Tech/l87-471 on 07.05.2007 by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh. Since inception, the assessee trust was carrying out its charitable activities in accordance with the objects as provided in the trust deed and the receipts of the assessee trust has been applied towards its charitable objects. After the establishment of the assessee

BHRAT CHAKRAVARTI CHARITABLE TRUST,DELHI vs. CIT (EXMP), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareekbharat Chakravarti Charitable Trust, Vs. Cit (Exemption), 44 – 45, Khasra No.32/17, Delhi. Uggar Sain Industrial Estate, Village Samepur, Delhi – 110 042. (Pan : Aeetb0851C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Princy Kr. Singhal, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2024 Date Of Order : 27.06.2024 Order Per Shamim Yahya: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Exemption), Delhi Dated 26.03.2024. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Delhi Rejecting The Application Of The Assessee For Approval Under Section 80G(5) Of The Income Tax Act Is Bad Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(E) Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Passing The Order

Charitable Trust, vs. CIT (Exemption), 44 – 45, Khasra No.32/17, Delhi. Uggar Sain Industrial Estate, Village Samepur, Delhi – 110 042. (PAN : AEETB0851C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Princy Kr. Singhal, CA REVENUE BY : Ms. Nidhi Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 25.06.2024 Date of Order : 27.06.2024 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against

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:

80G(5)(vi) of the Act vide order dated 27.09.2006. The assessee filed the return of income on 29.09.2009 declaring total income at Nil after claiming application of income as per the provisions of Section 11 of the Act. The said return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Later on, the case was selected for 3 Suvasini Charitable

SAT SHREE LALJI MISSION CHARITABLE TRUST,FARIDABAD vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Charitable Trust, Tax (Exemption), 2G-37, NIT, Faridabad, (Har) Vs. C. R. Building, PAN: AATTS9141F Sector-17E, Chandigarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Jitender Wadhwa, CA Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06/06/2025 Date of Pronouncement 11/06/2025 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM These appeals are inter-connected as these contain common facts. Therefore, these appeals

SAT SHREE LALJI MISSIONJ CHARITABLE TRUST,FARIDABAD vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Charitable Trust, Tax (Exemption), 2G-37, NIT, Faridabad, (Har) Vs. C. R. Building, PAN: AATTS9141F Sector-17E, Chandigarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Jitender Wadhwa, CA Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06/06/2025 Date of Pronouncement 11/06/2025 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM These appeals are inter-connected as these contain common facts. Therefore, these appeals

ACIT, CIRCLE- 32(1), NEW DELHI vs. WINDLASS STEEL CRAFTS LLP, NEW DELHI

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Charitable Trust, Tax (Exemption), 2G-37, NIT, Faridabad, (Har) Vs. C. R. Building, PAN: AATTS9141F Sector-17E, Chandigarh (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Jitender Wadhwa, CA Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06/06/2025 Date of Pronouncement 11/06/2025 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM These appeals are inter-connected as these contain common facts. Therefore, these appeals

MAGIC PATHSHALA,NEW DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat

charitable activities undertaken by the Trust, as registration under Section 12A of the Act has been duly granted to the Appellant by the Ld. CIT(E) itself. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(E) has grossly erred in rejecting the application for registration under Section 80G of the Act, despite there being no violation