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

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 were siphoned out and used by the members of the charitable society, fee receipts not fully reflected in the audited accounts

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 not disqualified to claim exemption - Income-tax Act, 1961." Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 That in respect of mismatch in interest income as per 26AS statement and in the books of accounts, it is submitted that the as per 26AS statement downloaded by the assessee from the income tax department site as on 19.09.2013, the interest income comes

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 not disqualified to claim exemption - Income-tax Act, 1961." Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 That in respect of mismatch in interest income as per 26AS statement and in the books of accounts, it is submitted that the as per 26AS statement downloaded by the assessee from the income tax department site as on 19.09.2013, the interest income comes

M/S. MADHYA PRADESH CRICKET ASSOCIATION,INDORE vs. THE DCIT 1(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed and consequently the order of the Ld

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaassessment Year: 2012-13 Madhya Pradesh Cricket Dcit, 1(1), Association Indore बनाम/ Holkar Stadium, Vs. 7, Race Course Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aaatg3527C Appellant By Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Shri Arpit Gaur (Ar) Revenue By Shri Lal Chand (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 21.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.06.2017

Charitable Purpose’ which is the last limb of section 2(15) of the Act. 32. In the light of above organizational structure developed in India for development and promotion of game of cricket, we may point out that during the period under consideration pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 the assessee hosted two IPL 52 M.P. Cricket Association matches on behalf

M/S. RISHIRAJ K.M.B. EDUCATION SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. THE CIT, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: Na

section 12AA(1) of the Act. Thereafter from the period of 29.03.2008 there is no change in the objects or the activities of the Society. Thus it cannot be said that the assessee has carried on activities which are not in accordance with its object. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO has also verified all the books

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

trust was 'charity' under the fourth head 'any other object of general public utility', it was permissible for such an object of general public utility, to augment its income by engaging in trading or commercial activities. In retrospect, it seems that it would have been better for Parliament to have deleted the fourth head of charity "any other object

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN,CHULGIRI BHOPAL vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeal

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

charitable and religious trust granted registration u/s 12A of the Act vide registration No.41/90-91 dated 13.12.1990. As the 12A registration certificate was misplaced, the assessee applied for a copy of the certificate through letter dated 21.04.2006. Then the office of the ld CIT vide letter dated 25.04.2006, confirmed that the trust has been granted registration u/s 12A. The application

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN,BHOPAL vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, Assessee’s appeal

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing

charitable and religious trust granted registration u/s 12A of the Act vide registration No.41/90-91 dated 13.12.1990. As the 12A registration certificate was misplaced, the assessee applied for a copy of the certificate through letter dated 21.04.2006. Then the office of the ld CIT vide letter dated 25.04.2006, confirmed that the trust has been granted registration u/s 12A. The application

NANCY ANN MILLER EDUCATIONAL TRUST,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-EXEMPTION, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2018-19 Nancy Ann Miller Income-Tax Officer, Educational Trust, Ward-(Exemption), बनाम/ 64/67, Dhar Kothi, Indore. Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaatn4010B Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.05.2024

charitable trust engaged in imparting education. It is registered u/s 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and entitled for exemption u/s 11/12; accordingly it claimed exemption u/s 11/12 in the return of income filed for AY 2018-19 on 31.08.2018 on the basis of audited accounts signed by auditors on 14.08.2018. When the AO processed intimation

ADARSH SHISHU VIHAR,INDORE vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU AND ITO EXEMPTION WARD, INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2019-20 Adarsh Shishu Vihar, Dcit, Cpc, Bengaluru & C/O Ca Rajesh Mehta, Ito (Exemption Ward), Rajesh Heeralal Mehta & Indore Company, Chartered Accountants, बनाम/ 203, Manas Bhawan Extn, Vs. 11, Rnt Marg, Near Hotel Shreemaya, Indore (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaaaa2270K Assessee By Shri Apurva Mehta, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 13 .06.2024

70,06,536/-. On verification of such intimation, the assessee realized mistake of claiming Page 2 of 12 Adarsh Shishu Vihar Assessment year 2019-20 exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) instead of correct exemption u/s 11/12 and therefore the assessee filed revised return u/s 139(5) on 20.11.2020 claiming exemption u/s 11/12 and declaring total income

SHRI NAVKAR PAARIVAR,INDORE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Navkar Pariwar Cit (Exemption) Indore बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aajts 8848 R Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 13.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 26.12.2022

charitable purposes. It submitted return of income declaring a total income of Rs. Nil, which was subjected to scrutiny and statutory notices u/s 143(2) / 142(1) were issued. Finally, the Ld. AO completed the assessment u/s 143(3) accepting the returned income. Subsequently, the Ld. PCIT examined the record of assessment-proceeding and observed that the assessment-order passed

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

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

SHREE VALLABH NAGAR JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTI PUJAK TRUST,INDORE vs. CIT EXEMPTION , BHOPAL

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Judicial Memebr & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 71/Ind/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : Na)

section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’). 2. The grounds of appeal raised in these appeals are identical which read as under:- “1.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Exemption) erred in not granting of registration U/S 12AA of the Income

SHRI SHWETAMBER JAIN TAPAGACH UPASHRAVA TRUST,INDORE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Judicial Memebr & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 71/Ind/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : Na)

section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’). 2. The grounds of appeal raised in these appeals are identical which read as under:- “1.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Exemption) erred in not granting of registration U/S 12AA of the Income

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)

70,135/- and reversed the provision of salary made by it in preceding previous year for the month of March 2010 at Rs.51,42,300/-, thereby giving a net effect on the provision of Rs.21,27,835/-. I found that such treatment on account of provision for salary is given by the appellant consistently on year to year basis which

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)

70,135/- and reversed the provision of salary made by it in preceding previous year for the month of March 2010 at Rs.51,42,300/-, thereby giving a net effect on the provision of Rs.21,27,835/-. I found that such treatment on account of provision for salary is given by the appellant consistently on year to year basis which

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)

70,135/- and reversed the provision of salary made by it in preceding previous year for the month of March 2010 at Rs.51,42,300/-, thereby giving a net effect on the provision of Rs.21,27,835/-. I found that such treatment on account of provision for salary is given by the appellant consistently on year to year basis which