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

Charitable Trust under the provisions of sections 11 to 13 of the Income Tax Act 1961, may please be noted.(P.P. 24 to 32 of the paper book) 4) The present Trustees and the Auditors of this trust are 3rd/ 4th generation, in a very long period of 75 years after the institution of this trust in the year

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

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

Charitable Trust Indore /ITANo.909/2019 4] The appellant reserves its right to add, alter and modify the grounds of appeal as taken by it. 1] GROUND NO. 1 TO 3 – CHALLENGING THE DEMAND AS CREATED ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT-DEDUCTION OF TAX AND INTEREST ON SUCH SHORT-DEDUCTION OF TAX ON THE PAYMENTS MADE TO HOSWIN INCINERATOR PRIVATE LIMITED

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

charitable or religious purposes in terms of the deed of trust. vii. Complying with all other provisions as required under the income tax or any other law. 10. The assessee has complied with all the above listed requirements and has not breached the trust entrusted by the Act while granting registration u/s 12A of the Act. 11. The apprehensions expressed

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 or religious purposes in terms of the deed of trust. vii. Complying with all other provisions as required under the income tax or any other law. 10. The assessee has complied with all the above listed requirements and has not breached the trust entrusted by the Act while granting registration u/s 12A of the Act. 11. The apprehensions expressed

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

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

section\n12AB(4) w.e.f. 01.04.2022 by Finance Act, 2022 would not apply\nretrospectively:\n(i)\nITAT, Bangalore in Amala Jyothi Vidya Kendra Trust Vs. PCIT (Central)\n(2024) 162 taxmann.com 41 (Bangalore – Trib), order dated\n16.04.2024\n(ii)\nITAT, Jaipur in Centre for Development Communication Trust Vs. CIT,\nExemption (2024) 168 taxmann.com 90 (Jaipur – Trib.), order dated\n03.06.2024

M/S. M.P. BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT EXCEMPTION , BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed

section 11(1)(a) grants exemption to “Income derived from\nproperty held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes, to the\nextent to which such income is applied to such purposes in\nIndia; .........". The controversy before us is very specific and limited i.e.\nWhether the Income-tax paid by assessee during current year by utilizing\nincome derived from property

DAWAT E ISLAMI,RAIPUR vs. THE CIT ( EXEMPTION ) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidawat E Islami Chhttisgarh Cit(Exemption) Sanjay Nagar R D A Plot Raipur Bhopal Vs. Raipur, Chhttisgarh (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aadtd 7213 R Assessee By Shri Ankit Chowksi, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2023

29 objects, 3 objects numbered as 1 to 3 are religious in nature and some other objects are charitable in nature which makes the trust as composite trust i.e. charitable and religious trust and therefore, the assessee is found to involved in violation of section

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

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

29 ITR 661 (SC), it was\nheld that the taxability of any income, does not depend on the view taken by\nthe assessee but as per the provisions of law. The taxpayer may not be\nestopped merely for the view he might have taken.\nd. It is always open to the assessee to withdraw his admission on facts.\nMurugesan & Bros

M/S MADHYA PRADESH MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Trust's (1992) 3 SCC 390 a decision relating to property tax, the Supreme Court held that both qualitative and quantitative tests should be satisfied in view of specific language of Section 115(4)(a) of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957. Nevertheless it negated and rejected the argument that data for one year should be taken into consideration

M/S MADHYA PRADESH MADHYAM,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT, BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee i

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Trust's (1992) 3 SCC 390 a decision relating to property tax, the Supreme Court held that both qualitative and quantitative tests should be satisfied in view of specific language of Section 115(4)(a) of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957. Nevertheless it negated and rejected the argument that data for one year should be taken into consideration

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

Trust's (1992) 3 SCC 390 a decision relating to property tax, the Supreme Court held that both qualitative and quantitative tests should be satisfied in view of specific language of Section 115(4)(a) of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957. Nevertheless it negated and rejected the argument that data for one year should be taken into consideration

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

Trust's (1992) 3 SCC 390 a decision relating to property tax, the Supreme Court held that both qualitative and quantitative tests should be satisfied in view of specific language of Section 115(4)(a) of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957. Nevertheless it negated and rejected the argument that data for one year should be taken into consideration

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

Trust's (1992) 3 SCC 390 a decision relating to property tax, the Supreme Court held that both qualitative and quantitative tests should be satisfied in view of specific language of Section 115(4)(a) of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957. Nevertheless it negated and rejected the argument that data for one year should be taken into consideration

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

Trust's (1992) 3 SCC 390 a decision relating to property tax, the Supreme Court held that both qualitative and quantitative tests should be satisfied in view of specific language of Section 115(4)(a) of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957. Nevertheless it negated and rejected the argument that data for one year should be taken into consideration