ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

trust based on religious tenets - Activities of trust both charitable and religious - benefits not exclusively meant for particular religious community - trust not disqualified to claim exemption - Income-tax Act, 1961." 6.Income tax Officer vs. Gaudiua Granth Anuved Trust (2014) 23 ITJ 141 (Trib.-Agra) ITAT, Agra Bench "Income – U/s 2(24) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - corpus Donation - Whether

M/S SHREE JAIRAM EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. ACIT CENTRAL-II, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

section 13 cannot be a basis for cancellation of registration u/s 12AA. Impugned order cancelling the registration u/s 12AA ought to be quashed. D. Apropos ground no. 7 – payment of excess salary, funds of the charitable trust were siphoned out and used by the members of the charitable society, fee receipts not fully reflected in the audited accounts

M/S SHREE JAIRAM EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

section 13 cannot be a basis for cancellation of registration u/s 12AA. Impugned order cancelling the registration u/s 12AA ought to be quashed. D. Apropos ground no. 7 – payment of excess salary, funds of the charitable trust were siphoned out and used by the members of the charitable society, fee receipts not fully reflected in the audited accounts

M/S TRUBA EDUCATION SOCIETY ,BHOPAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

sections (1)\nand (2), the Board or other income-tax authority authorised by it\nmay have regard to any one or more of the following criteria, namely:-\n(a) territorial area;\n(b) persons or classes of persons;\n(c) incomes or classes of income; and\n(d) cases or classes of cases.\nTherefore, in furtherance of the said provisions

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

34. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we allow the present writ petition and issue writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 17 th November, 2008 and mandamus is issued directing the respondents to grant approval under Section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act and the same shall be issued within six weeks from the date copy of this order

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

34. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we allow the present writ petition and issue writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 17 th November, 2008 and mandamus is issued directing the respondents to grant approval under Section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act and the same shall be issued within six weeks from the date copy of this order

M.P.MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

34. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we allow the present writ petition and issue writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 17 th November, 2008 and mandamus is issued directing the respondents to grant approval under Section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act and the same shall be issued within six weeks from the date copy of this order

M/S M.P. MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

34. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we allow the present writ petition and issue writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 17 th November, 2008 and mandamus is issued directing the respondents to grant approval under Section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act and the same shall be issued within six weeks from the date copy of this order

HARDA NAGAR BAL VIKAS SAMITI HARDA ,SARSWATI SHISHU MANDIR vs. ITO-1, HARDA, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms mentioned above

34,192\n27,19,994\nHarda Nagar Bal Vikash Samiti (Society)\n-\n(15,17,865)\nTotal\n2,36,39,736\n42,46,993\nSince the annual receipts exceeded the eligibility limit, the assessee ceased to be eligible for exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) from AY 2017-18. Therefore, the assessee filed an application to CIT(Exemption), Bhopal

BISA NEEMA PANCHAYAT BHAWAN TRUST,M.G ROAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) BHOPAL, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION) BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaa.Y. : 2023-24 Bisa Neema Panchayat Commissioner Of Income- Bhawan Trust, Tax (Exemption), बनाम/ 285, M.G. Road, Bhopal Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aactb4287E Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, C.A. & Ar Revenue By Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 27.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.11.2024

10 of 13 Bisa Neema Panchayat Bhawan Trust, Indore. ITA No. 480/Ind/2024 - A.Y. 2023-24 present case must be restored at the level of CIT(E) by giving a specific direction to assessee to file required reply to CIT(E). This would enable the CIT(E) to reconsider assessee’s entire submission and take appropriate view in the matter

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY ,BHOPAL vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

34,79,944/- as\n'application to charitable purpose'; and also deducted 15% 'standard\nexemption' u/s 11(1)(a) on full amount of Rs.2,27,31,112/-. Basically, the\nAO's understanding is that the activity of assessee is covered u/s 11(4)/(4A)\nbeing in the nature of 'business' incidental and therefore CBDT Circular

M/S. M. P. COUNCIL FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION & TRAINING BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. THE CIT (EXEMPYION) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

34,618/- and wrongly treating as surplus of assessee ignoring the submissions made on record. 3. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. AO erred in making addition of liability of Rs. 76,36,365/- as income of assessee on wrong basis and ignoring submissions made on record. ITA No. 177/Ind/2022

M/S. M. P. COUNCIL FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION & TRAINING BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. THE CIT (EXEMPYION) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

34,618/- and wrongly treating as surplus of assessee ignoring the submissions made on record. 3. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. AO erred in making addition of liability of Rs. 76,36,365/- as income of assessee on wrong basis and ignoring submissions made on record. ITA No. 177/Ind/2022

PROF. RAJENDRA SINGH SHIKSHAN SAMITI,MANDSAUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU AND ITO (EXEMPTION), UJJAIN, UJJAIN

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

Bench: Sh. Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

charitable society (solely for educational purpose) registered u/s. 12AA and 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. Thus, the disallowance of exemption is liable to be deleted and tax should not be levied upon the assessee society running solely for educational purpose. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

PRASAM RAKESH CHOUDHARY,GIRNAR SOCIETY, BAPURAO GALLI, ITWARI, NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, BHOPAL , BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit Circle-1(1) M/S. Rashtriya Takniki Bhopal Shikshak Prashikshan Evam Anunsandhan Sansthan बनाम/ Samiti, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aabar2266H Assessee By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Shri Vinod Joshi, Ar Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2025

charitable trust registered under section 12A of the Income Tax Act (the Act). The income of the appellant is exempt u/s. 10(23C) of the Act. The appellant filed the return of income for the impugned A.Y. declaring Nil income after claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act. An order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 was passed in which

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BHOPOAL, BHOPAL vs. M/S RASHTRIYA TAKNIKI SHIKSHAK PRASHIKSHAN EVAM ANUNSANDHAN SANSTHAN, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit Circle-1(1) M/S. Rashtriya Takniki Bhopal Shikshak Prashikshan Evam Anunsandhan Sansthan बनाम/ Samiti, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aabar2266H Assessee By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Shri Vinod Joshi, Ar Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2025

charitable trust registered under section 12A of the Income Tax Act (the Act). The income of the appellant is exempt u/s. 10(23C) of the Act. The appellant filed the return of income for the impugned A.Y. declaring Nil income after claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act. An order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 was passed in which

AARAMBH FOUNDATION,INDORE vs. THE CIT EXEMPTION, BYHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniaarambh Foundation Cit-(Exemption) 220 Saket Nagar Bhopal Saket Nagar Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabaa 0609F Assessee By Shri Kunal Agrawal Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 04.01.2024

34,898/- 66,472/- 9.05% 2021-22 10,10,225/- 1,33,300/- 13.02% Therefore, if the assessee is charging amount only to recover the cost incurred for the charitable activities and for providing the training to the poor against normal charge and the said receipts are again applied by the assessee for achieving its overall objects of providing medical

SHRIDHAR GYAN PRASAR PARMARTHIK TRUST, RAJGAD,RAJGAD vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, assessee’s appeal in 9

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Shri Shridhar Gyan Prasar Parmarthik Trust Rajgad Pan :Aafts0410D : Appellant

34 CCH 0108, 150 TTJ 0452: (2012), 3. Umaid Charitable Trust vs. Union of India & Ors., HC Raj., (2008)218 CTR 0030” 5. Per contra Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently argued supporting the order of Ld. CIT(E) and also submitted that approval u/s 80G of the Act should not be granted to the assessee as it is solely running