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

section 12A – list of bonors submitted – Incomplete details of donors does not mean donations are unaccounted money – Addition of Donations as cash credit and denying benefit not justified – Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 11, 12A, 68.” CIT (E) v. Patanjali Yogpeeth (NYAS) (2018) 252 Taxman 317/300 CTR 266 (Delhi)(HC). Property held for charitable purposes- Propagation of yoga falls

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

section 12A – list of bonors submitted – Incomplete details of donors does not mean donations are unaccounted money – Addition of Donations as cash credit and denying benefit not justified – Income-tax Act, 1961, ss. 11, 12A, 68.” CIT (E) v. Patanjali Yogpeeth (NYAS) (2018) 252 Taxman 317/300 CTR 266 (Delhi)(HC). Property held for charitable purposes- Propagation of yoga falls

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.

12A [as it stood before its amendment by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 (33 of 1996)] and subsequently it is noticed that Chirayu Charitable Foundation 50[(a) the activities of the trust or the institution are being carried out in a manner that the provisions of sections 11 and 12 do not apply to exclude either whole

CHANDRA SAHU,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(4), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

2 clause 12A and section 44AA of the Act.N [emphasis supplied] 3.Considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case and the applicable law, addition made u/s 68

CHANDRA SAHU,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(4), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2010-

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

2 clause 12A and section 44AA of the Act.N [emphasis supplied] 3.Considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case and the applicable law, addition made u/s 68

M/S. GYAN SAGAR SOCIETY,INDORE vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), INDORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2010-11 Gyan Sagar Society, Deputy Commissioner Of C/O Mahesh Thahirani, Vs. Income Tax-Circle 1(1), L, Triveni Colony, Indore Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Akgpj5075N Revenue By Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri Morish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Advocates Date Of Hearing 17.7.2018 Date Of 26.7.2018 Pronouncement

12A of I.T. Act is an essential condition for getting exemption u/s 11 of I.T. Act, but getting registered alone is not sufficient, till appellant satisfies the Assessing Officer that all the activities carried out by it in a particular year are charitable in nature and not commercial. As held in the order for rejection of application

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

12A cannot be cancelled”. The Hon’ble Tribunal discussed many cases on this point from page 68 to page 76 and held that the cancellation of registration is not justified. We rely on all the case laws mentioned in the said order. It is humbly submitted that all the registrations of various societies were cancelled on the same facts

ACIT CENTRAL-2 INDORE, INDORE vs. SHRI .GAURAV TEKRIWAL, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Acit, Central -2 Shri Gaurav Tekriwal Indore बनाम/ 204, Princess Valley, South Tukoganj, Indore Vs. (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Acppt 1628 Q Assessee By Shri Anil Kamal Garg, Arpit Gaur, Ars Revenue By Shri P.K. Mitra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 21.11.2022

12A of 97. A copy of the Decree passed against the FMG by the Civil Court is submitted as Annexure C- 2.00. 8.00 That, against the Decree passed by the Civil Court, the assessee filed an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh, at Indore. The Hon'ble High Court, vide its Order delivered

SEWA SAHKARI SAMMITTEE MARYADIT,BEED, MUNDI KHANDWA vs. PCIT-1, INDORE

In the result, appeal by the assesse is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisewa Sahkari Sammittee Pr. Cit-2 Maryadit Beed Indore Vs. Beed Mundi Khandwa (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aaufs0703N Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 05.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.10.2023

12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) Page 2 of 32 Sewa Sahakari Sammittee Maryadit Beed Page 3 of 32 of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. INDUS EDUCATION AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE, RAIPUR

Appeal is dismissed

68,20,000/- has been made on account of\nviolation of section 13(3).\nPage 6 of 7\nDy. CIT (Exemption), Bhopal vs. Indus Education and Research Institute, Raipur\nITA No. 177/Ind/2024 - AY 2018-19\n6.\nTherefore, we do not find any infirmity or error in the order passed by\nCIT(A). Consequently, the same is hereby upheld

M/S. HERO'S EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 3(1), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

2. Ground No. 1 relates to not justified in upholding the disallowance of deduction u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee society is an educational institution registered under the M.P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973. It is also registered u/s 12A of the Income

MAHAKAVI PANDIT BHURAMAL SAMAJIK SAHKAR NYAS,SAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals filed by the

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

section 2(15) of the Act is satisfied, however, in respect of second condition, he is of the view that the receipts are likely to exceed, hence, condition No.2 is not satisfied. Considering this, he rejected the application. This reasoning as given by the Ld. CIT(Exemption) is contrary to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi

MAHAKAVI PANDIT BHURAMAL SAMAJIK SAHKAR NYAS,SAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, both the appeals filed by the

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

section 2(15) of the Act is satisfied, however, in respect of second condition, he is of the view that the receipts are likely to exceed, hence, condition No.2 is not satisfied. Considering this, he rejected the application. This reasoning as given by the Ld. CIT(Exemption) is contrary to the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi

DCIT 1(1), INDORE vs. M/S MAA UMIYA AGRITECH PVT. LTD. , INDORE

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit 1(1) M/S. Maa Umiya Agritech Pvt. Ltd. Indore 119, A.B. Road, Aloo Pyaj Mandi, Vs. Indore (Appellant / (Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn8230F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ar Date Of Hearing 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2023

12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.” Accordingly, in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme

AISECT LTD. ,BHOPAL vs. ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

68,227/- on which no interest was received. Thus, the assessee has advanced the money for non business purposes. The assessee had advances money to the staff and others. The interest of Rs.3,60,465/- has been paid for the loan taken for purchase of car. No borrowed funds were advanced and the interest is paid on the borrowings

AISECT LTD. ,BHOPAL vs. ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

68,227/- on which no interest was received. Thus, the assessee has advanced the money for non business purposes. The assessee had advances money to the staff and others. The interest of Rs.3,60,465/- has been paid for the loan taken for purchase of car. No borrowed funds were advanced and the interest is paid on the borrowings

ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL vs. AISECT LTD. , BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

68,227/- on which no interest was received. Thus, the assessee has advanced the money for non business purposes. The assessee had advances money to the staff and others. The interest of Rs.3,60,465/- has been paid for the loan taken for purchase of car. No borrowed funds were advanced and the interest is paid on the borrowings

ACIT RANGE 1(1), BHOPAL vs. AISECT LTD. , BHOPAL

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

68,227/- on which no interest was received. Thus, the assessee has advanced the money for non business purposes. The assessee had advances money to the staff and others. The interest of Rs.3,60,465/- has been paid for the loan taken for purchase of car. No borrowed funds were advanced and the interest is paid on the borrowings