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.

trusts were found which are of the same date i.e. 03.06.2013. All the above circumstances along with the failure of assessee to furnish any details or confirmation of donations received are suggestive of manipulation and show that the donations are suspect. (ii) Corpus Donation of Rs. 8,15,90,000/- has been received by Chirayu Charitable Foundation from Riviera Infoway

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

section 2(15) is adhered to. It is only in the event of the trust actually carrying on an activity in the course of achieving one of its objects, and earning income which should not exceed the quantitative limit prescribed at the relevant time, that it can be said to be driven by charitable

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

section 2(15) is adhered to. It is only in the event of the trust actually carrying on an activity in the course of achieving one of its objects, and earning income which should not exceed the quantitative limit prescribed at the relevant time, that it can be said to be driven by charitable

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

section 2(15) is adhered to. It is only in the event of the trust actually carrying on an activity in the course of achieving one of its objects, and earning income which should not exceed the quantitative limit prescribed at the relevant time, that it can be said to be driven by charitable

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

section 2(15) is adhered to. It is only in the event of the trust actually carrying on an activity in the course of achieving one of its objects, and earning income which should not exceed the quantitative limit prescribed at the relevant time, that it can be said to be driven by charitable

FAIZAN E BURHANE MILLAT TRUST,JABALPUR vs. THE CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanifaizan E Burhane Millat Cit(Exemption) Trust Bhopal 181/1, Baitla Colony Vfj Society, Ward Shaheed, Abdul Vs. Hameed, Raza Chowk Milk, Scheme Road, Jabalpur (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaatf8671J Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Nd Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. -Dr Date Of Hearing 13.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2024

charitable in nature Page 15 of 18 ITANo.55/Ind/2023 Faizan E Burhane Millat Trust the activity of the assesse trust are not restricted to any particular community or cast but those activities are available for the public and society at large. Accordingly the provisions of section

SARSWATI VIDHYA PRATISHTHAN M.P ,BHUPAL vs. THE ACIT 2(1), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisarswati Vidhya Pratishthan Dcit (E) M.P. Bhopal Vs. 01, Harshwardhan Nagar Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadas0899M Assessee By Shri Santosh Deshmukh & Shri Parth Jhawar, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.08.2023

Section 2(15) of the Act i.e. relief to the poor; education or medical relief. Thus, where the purpose of a trust or institution is relief of the poor; education or medical relief, it will constitute 'charitable

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

15) of the Act, secondly, the appellant trust has contravened the provisions of Ss. 11(5) and 13(1) (c) of the Act. Thirdly, the trust is treated by the Chairman and family members /relatives as their private property and enjoyed by them for their benefits only. There is nothing on record to suggest that the Trust is not 'genuine

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

15) of the Act, secondly, the appellant trust has contravened the provisions of Ss. 11(5) and 13(1) (c) of the Act. Thirdly, the trust is treated by the Chairman and family members /relatives as their private property and enjoyed by them for their benefits only. There is nothing on record to suggest that the Trust is not 'genuine

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

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

15(I) of the Trust-Deed titled “Special Important Rules” contains adequate provisions for amendments. Ld. AR also submitted that section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 contains a specific provision requiring re-registration of trust in the event of any amendment or modification. Therefore, according to Ld. AR, incorporation or non-incorporation of Amendment Clause in the Trust

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

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

15(I) of the Trust-Deed titled “Special Important Rules” contains adequate provisions for amendments. Ld. AR also submitted that section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 contains a specific provision requiring re-registration of trust in the event of any amendment or modification. Therefore, according to Ld. AR, incorporation or non-incorporation of Amendment Clause in the Trust

SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SUKRAT FUND KAODA COMMITTEE,INDORE vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradshri Jain Shwetamber Cit (Exemption) Bhopal Murtipujak Sukrat Fund Vs. Kapda Committee, 11/12, Mahavir Marg, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan Aabts6859G Appellant By Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, Ca Revenue By Smt. Ashima Gupta, Cit Date Of Hearing 15.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 29.09.2020 O R D E R Per Manish Borad, Am. This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit

Section 11 of the Act available for 12 Shri Jain Shwetamber Murtipujak Sukrat Fund Kapda Committee charitable trust registered u/s 12AA of the Act so that the Ld. A.O could decide accordingly for various assessment years wherein assessee have been denied the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act. We thus allow the additional grounds raised by the assessee

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

section 133A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on the premises of the appellant on 15-05-2014 to verify the TDS compliances. A.3] During the course of TDS Survey proceedings, the assessing officer opined that the appellant was liable to deduct TDS at the rate of 10% 3 Arihand Charitable Trust

DIVYASDHANA CHARITALLE TRUST,INDORE vs. THE CIT (E) CIRCLE , BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed in terms indicated above

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

Charitable Trust, Indore. Vs. CIT(E), ITA No.138 & 139/Ind/2023 disposed of with the direction to the Commissioner to consider the case of the petitioner-trust for renewal of its registration with effect from the insertion of sub-section (5B) uninfluenced by the impugned order of rejecting the renewal for the assessment years 1995-2000. In other words, the petitioner

DIVYASDHANA CHARITALLE TRUST,INDORE vs. THE CIT (E) CIRCLE , BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed in terms indicated above

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

Charitable Trust, Indore. Vs. CIT(E), ITA No.138 & 139/Ind/2023 disposed of with the direction to the Commissioner to consider the case of the petitioner-trust for renewal of its registration with effect from the insertion of sub-section (5B) uninfluenced by the impugned order of rejecting the renewal for the assessment years 1995-2000. In other words, the petitioner

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 – Donations received in previous year – Assessee only required to show donations were voluntary – More than 75% of income used for charitable purposes in accordance with objects – Assessee duly registered under section 12A – list of bonors submitted – Incomplete details of donors does not mean donations are unaccounted money – Addition of Donations as cash credit and denying benefit not justified – Income

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

Trust – Donations received in previous year – Assessee only required to show donations were voluntary – More than 75% of income used for charitable purposes in accordance with objects – Assessee duly registered under section 12A – list of bonors submitted – Incomplete details of donors does not mean donations are unaccounted money – Addition of Donations as cash credit and denying benefit not justified – Income

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)

trust or institution or its is ancillary or incidental to the dominant or primary object which is charitable and in the case of the appellant university the main object is clearly education which is charitable object as per section 2(15