WAKEUP FOUNDATION,INDORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the grounds of

Bench: Shri Paresh M. Joshi & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.895 & 898/Ind/2024 (Hybrid Hearing) Wakeup Foundation, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), 41/411, Jangampura, South Bhopal Rajmohalla, Mp - 452002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaaw9534A (Appellant) (Respondent)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 6. The facts of the case are that the assessee “Wakeup Foundation, PAN – AAAW9534A” had applied for registration under the new provisions of section 12AB and 80G

JWALA MAHILA SAMITI,121 AB SCHEME NO 54 ,VIJAY NAGAR INDORE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

section 80G(5) if the dominant purpose remains charitable, as clarified by CBDT Circular No. 11/2008 dated 19.12.2008. 6. That, the impugned order is non-speaking, lacks reasoned findings, and does not reflect proper application of mind. It mechanically relies on percentages of revenue from sales without examining the nature and purpose of such receipts OR their application, rendering

LILAWATI WELFARE SOCIETY,UJJAIN vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

section 12AB & 80G(5). Hence, the assessee subsequently filed second appeal relating to approval u/s 80G(5) after a delay. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has filed an application/affidavit for condonation

RAJESH PRAJAPATI ,UJJAIN vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1) , UJJAIN

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2013-14 Shri Rajesh Prajapati, A.C.I.T., बनाम/ 15, Naliya Bakhal, Circle 2(1), Ujjain Ujjain Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Alnpp5190Q Assessee By Ms.Sonam Khandelwal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2023

80G. Page 1 of 12 Shri Rajesh Prajapati, Ujjain, Assessment year 2013-14 2. Heard the learned Representatives of both sides at length and case- records perused. 3. The Registry has informed that as per Form No. 36 filed by assessee- appellant, the impugned order dated 16.08.2017 was served upon assessee on 25.08.2017. Therefore, this appeal must have been filed

CORPORATEN AREA BASKETBALL TRUST,INDORE vs. THE CIT EXEMPTION., BHOPAL

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

section 80G(5) Page 2 of 7 Corporaten Area Basketball Trust, Indore. ITA No. 447/Ind/2023 & ITA No. 77/Ind/2023 whereupon the CIT(E) granted provisional approval vide order dated 15.10.2021 for the period from 15.10.2021 to AY 2024-25. Thereafter, the assessee sought final approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) and for this purpose, filed application dated 29.09.2022 to CIT(E). However

CORPORATEN AREA BASKETBALL TRUST,INDORE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

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

section 80G(5) Page 2 of 7 Corporaten Area Basketball Trust, Indore. ITA No. 447/Ind/2023 & ITA No. 77/Ind/2023 whereupon the CIT(E) granted provisional approval vide order dated 15.10.2021 for the period from 15.10.2021 to AY 2024-25. Thereafter, the assessee sought final approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) and for this purpose, filed application dated 29.09.2022 to CIT(E). However