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

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

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

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.

2(15) of the Income Tax Act which reads that :- (15) " charitable purpose" includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief, [preservation of environment (including watersheds, forests and wildlife) and preservation of monuments or places or objects of artistic or historic interest)and the advancement of any other object of general public utility ; 15. To achieve the above aims

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

2(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

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

2(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

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

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 Indore /ITANo.909/2019 under section 194J of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 instead of TDS deducted by the appellant at the rate of 2

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

trust or institution undertaking such activity or activities, of that previous year," In view of the above proviso it is clear that the commercial receipts of the assessee are far more than 20% of total receipts during the years and the assessee does not come under the purview of section 2(15) of the Act for 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

Trust pollution’s control, planting trees and health awareness program etc. are all the activities of promoting well-being of general public and are charitable in nature. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Dawoodi Bohara Jamat (supra) has observed in para 30,36 & 38 as under: “30.According to Section 2(15

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

2(24) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – corpus Donation – Whether same is taxable – HELD – Same is not taxable as same is a capital receipt.” 5.Director of Income-tax (Exemption) vs. Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation (2005) 278 ITR 152 (Delhi High Court) “Exemption – Charitable purpose – Trust – Donations received in previous year – Assessee only required to show donations were voluntary

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

2(24) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – corpus Donation – Whether same is taxable – HELD – Same is not taxable as same is a capital receipt.” 5.Director of Income-tax (Exemption) vs. Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation (2005) 278 ITR 152 (Delhi High Court) “Exemption – Charitable purpose – Trust – Donations received in previous year – Assessee only required to show donations were voluntary

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

2 of section 12A of the Income Tax Act 1961 . Copies relied upon:- a. Sardar Bhawan Trust v ITO 2014 Tax Pub (DT) 2502 (Ahd-Trib) b. Sree Ramdev Bhawan Trust V DIT (Exemption) II Chennai. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee also submitted that the assessee trust possess sufficient record to demonstrate that the Income Tax authorities have accepted

AKSHAY ACADEMY,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI, THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniakshay Academy Ito, Nfac 32 Kaimaidan Road, Delhi Khasgi Gagicha Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadta8987B Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

charitable trust. Sections 12A and 12AA detail the procedural requirements for making an application to claim exemptions under sections 11 and 12 by the assessee and the grant or rejection of such application by the commissioner. Thus, in my view, sections 12A and 12AA are only procedural in nature. Hence, it is not the registration u/s 12AA by itself that

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

charitable activity as\nper the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act, and there is no change in the\naforesaid activity and hence withdrawal of registration u/s.12AB(4) of the\nAct on the ground that the activities of the trust

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

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

2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 25-9-1998, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Udaipur (Annexure-9) thereby the application of the petitioner-trust for renewal of exemption under section 80G was refused, inter alia, on the ground that in one of the objects of the trust deed the construction of temples etc. was included though

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

2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 25-9-1998, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Udaipur (Annexure-9) thereby the application of the petitioner-trust for renewal of exemption under section 80G was refused, inter alia, on the ground that in one of the objects of the trust deed the construction of temples etc. was included though