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

Charitable Trust v. CIT (Exemptions) v. CIT (Exemptions) [2017] 83 taxmann.com 33 (Lucknow - Trib.) Hon’ble Tribunal while dealing with the issue of Cancellation of registration under Section 12AA (iii) of the I.T Act held that: Para "Having carefully examined the order of the Id. Commissioner of 13. Income Tax (Exemptions) in the light of the rival submissions, we find

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

charitable trust as mentioned in section 115BBC (2) of the Act and hence provisions of sub-section (1) of the section 115BBC of the Act are squarely applicable in the case of the assessee as in case of the assessee, anonymous donations as per section 115BBC(3) has been found. 4.40 Without any prejudice to the above, it is also

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

charitable trust as mentioned in section 115BBC (2) of the Act and hence provisions of sub-section (1) of the section 115BBC of the Act are squarely applicable in the case of the assessee as in case of the assessee, anonymous donations as per section 115BBC(3) has been found. 4.40 Without any prejudice to the above, it is also

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

250 (Mad).”\n15. Ld. AR next submitted that he would also like to address one more\npoint adopted by Ld. PCIT(Central) for cancellation of registration. He\nsubmitted that the Ld. PCIT(Central) has alleged violation of section 13(3) by\nassessee [on account of payments made to or for the benefit of interested\npersons] and noted that the violation

SHRI PARSHVANATH DIGAMBAR JAIN DHARMIK AND SAMAJIK SANSTHA,RAM GALI, NEEMUCH CANT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYKAR BHAWAN INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

section 69A\nof the Act.\n4. The Ld. NFAC confirmed the addition by dismissing the appeal of the Appellant. Being aggrieved\nby the said action and the impugned addition of Rs.76,38,102/-, the present Appellant is before\nthis Hon'ble Tribunal.\nSubmission before Ld. AO during Assessment Proceedings Not Considered by AO:\nShri Parshvanath Digambar Jain Dharmik and Samajik

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,

250 (Mad).”\n15.\nLd. AR continued his submission to contend that the Ld. PCIT(Central)\nhas gained a wrong understanding that the violations of section 13(3) [on\naccount of payments to or for the benefits of interested persons], even if\nthere be, attracted cancellation of approval u/s 10(23C)(vi). He submitted\nthat the violation of section

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

charitable purpose and the machinery part of section 11(4A). Further, the obligation under section 11(4A) to maintain separate books of account in respect of such receipts is to ensure that the quantitative limit imposed by sub-clause (ii) to section 2(15) can be computed and ascertained in an objective manner. 171. Therefore, pure charity in the sense

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

charitable purpose and the machinery part of section 11(4A). Further, the obligation under section 11(4A) to maintain separate books of account in respect of such receipts is to ensure that the quantitative limit imposed by sub-clause (ii) to section 2(15) can be computed and ascertained in an objective manner. 171. Therefore, pure charity in the sense

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

charitable purpose and the machinery part of section 11(4A). Further, the obligation under section 11(4A) to maintain separate books of account in respect of such receipts is to ensure that the quantitative limit imposed by sub-clause (ii) to section 2(15) can be computed and ascertained in an objective manner. 171. Therefore, pure charity in the sense

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

charitable purpose and the machinery part of section 11(4A). Further, the obligation under section 11(4A) to maintain separate books of account in respect of such receipts is to ensure that the quantitative limit imposed by sub-clause (ii) to section 2(15) can be computed and ascertained in an objective manner. 171. Therefore, pure charity in the sense

SHRI DANDI SEWA ASHRAM,ONKARESHWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION , BHOPAL

In the result the \"Impugned order\" is set aside as and by\nway of remand back to the file of the Ld

charitable trust, the Tribunal held that the substantive benefit of the report should not be denied due to a procedural lapse on the part of the auditor/counsel.", "result": "Remanded", "sections": [ "253", "250

SHREE TEKCHANDJI MAHARAJ TRUST,UJJAIN vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, UJJAIN

250 of the\nAct, which is herein after referred to as the “Impugned\norder\". The Relevant Assessment year is 2016-17 and the\ncorresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2015 to\n31.03.2016.\n2.\nFactual Matrix\n2.1 That as and by way of an Assessment order made u/s\n147 rws 144B of the Act, the total income of the Assessee\nwas

M/S INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,INDORE vs. THE DCIT, 5(1), INDORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2011-12 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit- Indore Development Authority, बनाम/ (Exemption) Ida Building,7, Race Course Vs. Road, Indore Bhopal (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Years: 2012-13 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue)

section 250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 passed by the learned Indore Development Authority ITANos.847 870 & 1355/Ind/2016 Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-II, Bhopal, pertaining to the assessment year 2011-12 in response to the appeal filed against the Assessment Order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income- Tax, 5(1) Exemption, Bhopal 1.That, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly

THE DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL vs. M/S. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2011-12 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit- Indore Development Authority, बनाम/ (Exemption) Ida Building,7, Race Course Vs. Road, Indore Bhopal (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Years: 2012-13 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue)

section 250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 passed by the learned Indore Development Authority ITANos.847 870 & 1355/Ind/2016 Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-II, Bhopal, pertaining to the assessment year 2011-12 in response to the appeal filed against the Assessment Order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income- Tax, 5(1) Exemption, Bhopal 1.That, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly

M/S INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,INDORE vs. THE ACIT (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the revenue for A

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Years: 2011-12 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit- Indore Development Authority, बनाम/ (Exemption) Ida Building,7, Race Course Vs. Road, Indore Bhopal (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaji0103J Assessment Years: 2012-13 Indore Development Authority, Dcit-5(1) बनाम/ Ida Building,7, Race Course Indore Vs. Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue)

section 250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 passed by the learned Indore Development Authority ITANos.847 870 & 1355/Ind/2016 Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-II, Bhopal, pertaining to the assessment year 2011-12 in response to the appeal filed against the Assessment Order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income- Tax, 5(1) Exemption, Bhopal 1.That, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly

CHARCHIT GARG,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

250 of the Act and upholding the addition of Rs. 4,58,090/- for the reason that the report in form No. 10DA was not filed within the time prescribed. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. J-CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the assessee complied with all requisite for claiming

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 20.02.2024 which has emanated from the order of the Assessing Officer, CPC, Bengaluru passed u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 12.03.2020. 2 I.T.A. No. 417/Ind/2024 Rajendra Singh Shikshan Samiti v. DCIT 2. It is pointed out by the registry that the appeal is belatedly filed by 14 days