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

1)(c)(ii) and section 13(3). Violation of provisions of 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

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

1)(c)(ii) and section 13(3). Violation of provisions of 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

M/S SHISHUKUNJ EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,THE SHISHUKUNJ INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, GRAM JHALARIA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX. AAYKAR BHAWAN,

trust or an institution has been granted\nunder clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section\n12AB or clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 12AA, as the case may be,\nand subsequently,\n********\n(II) The term \"specified violation\" is proposed to be defined by inserting\nan Explanation to sub-section

CIT(E),BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. SHRI MAHAVIR KUND KUND TRUST, UJJAIN

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri B.M. Biyani

charitable purposes. The decisions referred to by the learned counsel for the assessee squarely apply to this case. The findings of the CIT that the provisions of section 13(1)(b) apply to the assessee-trust is, therefore, set aside.” Ld. AR also made an alternative submission that even otherwise section 13(1)(b), which denies exemption

MAHAVIR KUND KUND KAHAN TRUST,BARHANPUR vs. CIT(E) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri B.M. Biyani

charitable purposes. The decisions referred to by the learned counsel for the assessee squarely apply to this case. The findings of the CIT that the provisions of section 13(1)(b) apply to the assessee-trust is, therefore, set aside.” Ld. AR also made an alternative submission that even otherwise section 13(1)(b), which denies exemption

CHIRAYU CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,BHOPAL vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradchirayu Charitable Pcit (Central), Foundation,Bhopal Indore Bhopal Highway, Bhaisakhedi, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Aaaac3656P Revenue By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit Appellant By S/Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Advocate, Gagan Tiwari & Piyush Parashar, Advs Date Of Hearing 05.01.2021 Date Of Pronouncement .02.2021 O R D E R Per Manish Borad, Am.

1), Mumbai. (c) With respect to donation from Udhodas Mundhra Seva Santhan (AAATU0983C) – Rs. 5000000 (i) Confirmation letter (Seized document) (ii) Appeal by the assessee to the donor for giving donation. (Seized document) 33. We observe that two trusts namely Thakur Educational Trust and Zagdu Singh Charitable Trust which have given donation of Rs.1.60 crores and Rs.2.00 crores during financial

M/S. ARIHANT CHERITABLE TRUST,INDORE vs. THE ITO (TDS)-1, INDORE

In the result, we find no force in the ground of the Revenue, hence dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2015-16

C’ in the case of M/s Coimbatore Integrated Waste Management Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-TDS, Coimbatore [I.T.A. No. 2710/Mum/2015] vide order dated 01-03-2018 has held that: [Page No. 62-67] “5………………..The issue to be decided is as to whether the work carried out by the assessee would fall in the category of technical services as envisaged

DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL vs. VANASHPATI SMRITI SHIKSHA SAMITI, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the cross- objection of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani(Virtual Hearing) & C.O. No.33/Ind/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit (Exemption) Vanashpati Smriti Bhopal Shiksha Samiti, Bhopal बनाम/ (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Assessee) Vs. P.A. No. Aadts0547H Appellant By Shri P.K. Mitra Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Pavan Ved, Ar Date Of Hearing: 03.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.05.2022 आदेश / O R D E R

1)(c) also came to an end. Being so, the fear of the assessee that the Ld. AO is not going to allow the expenditure on acquisition of fixed assets as application of income, is automatically dispelled. To conclude the Ground No. 5 comes to an end due to dismissal of Ground No. 3 and 4. Accordingly the Ground

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

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

13 Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 laid down in section 115BBC(3) of lite Act.TIlt: sub-section (3) of section 115BBC has explained the meaning of anonymous donation clearly that such institution is required to maintain records of identity indicting the names and addresses of the persons making the donations or contributions. On a perusal of records

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

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

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

13 Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 laid down in section 115BBC(3) of lite Act.TIlt: sub-section (3) of section 115BBC has explained the meaning of anonymous donation clearly that such institution is required to maintain records of identity indicting the names and addresses of the persons making the donations or contributions. On a perusal of records

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

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

C\" which shows Govt\nGrant and fees without taking Mess fess and another chart in Annexure \"D\"\nwhich shows Govt grant and fees taken Mess fess which shows that if the\nsaid receipts would had added in previous years then also the Appellant\nincome was exempted u/s 10(23C)(iiiab) of Income Tax Act 1961.\nIt is, therefore, requested

M/S RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIK VISHWAVIDHALYA,BHOPAL vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: Na (12Aa)

13(3) of the Act. ix. There are several non charitable objects in the object clause. x. The major activities do not come under purview of the term education as used in section 2(15) of the Act. In fact, major receipts are from such activities wherein huge profits have been generated consistently which show the commercial nature of activities

M/S. DEVI SHAKUNTALA THKARAL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,BHOPAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Devi Shakuntala Dcit Thakral Charitable (Exemption) बनाम/ Foundation Bhopal Vs. Bhopal (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aaatd2943B

trust or section 10(23C)(iv), 10(23C)(v), institution as mentioned in section 11(3)(d) 10(23C)(vi) or 10(23C)(via) From the above table it is evident that none of the conditions as mentioned in section 11(3) have been triggered in the instant case. Even if it had been so, addition if any would have

AIC- RNTU FOUNDATION,RAISEN vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

Appeal are allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2019-20

section 2(15) is applicable. 6.2 It is stated from above facts that, the activities of the society cannot said to be in the nature of charitable activities for public 11 AIC-RNTU Foundation /ITANo.940/2019 at large, but commercial in nature and also the activities are of a service provider/facilitator for which funds by way of grant

SUSHILA TIWARI SHIKSHA SANSTHAN,INDORE vs. CIT(E), BHOPAL

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

13(3)/13(1)(c), is a point which can be validly examined on year-to- year basis while assessing taxable income of assessee but certainly not at the stage of grant of registration. In support of this proposition, Ld. AR relied upon several decisions including the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Madhya Pradesh

M/S. DEVI SHAKUNTALA THKARAL CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,BHOPAL vs. PR CIT ,CENTRAL, BHOPAL

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

section 12AA(3) and 13(1)(c) are wholly unjustified, injudicious and unlawful and, therefore, all such findings be quashed and the registration u/s. 12AA(3) be kindly granted/restored. That on the facts & in the circumstances of the case and (3) in law, the findings of the learned PCIT and his decision that the activities of the trust