SETH RAMDAS NATHUBHAI DHARMADAYA VISHWASTA NIDHI,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,(EXEMPTIONS) -1,, PUNE

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Seth Ramdas Nathubhai Dharmadaya Vs. Ito Vishwasta Nidhi, (Exemptions)-1, C/O. Shah Khandelwal Jain & Pune Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wellesley Road, Near Rto, Pune 411 001 Pan : Aaatr6805N Appellant Respondent

charitable objects of the trust. We do not find any infirmity therefore with the findings of the ld. CIT(A) nor with the findings of the ld. AO 17 Seth Ramdas Nathubhai Dharmadaya Vishwasta Nidhi and we hold that the Revenue authorities were correct in denying exemption u/s.11 in respect of violation of the provisions of section

GOLDEN CHARITABLE TRUST,SANGLI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.933/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :- Golden Charitable Trust, The Cit Exemption, 2349, Guruwar Peth, Miraj, V Pune. Maharashtra – 416410. S Pan: Aactg0998H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Keyur Patel – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Under Section 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Passed On 30.06.2023.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Learned Cit (Exemption) Has Erred In Fact & In Law In Rejecting The Application For The Registration Of The Trust U/S. 12A(1) (Ac) Despite The Fact That Appellant Trust Is Engaged In Pursuing Purely Charitable Objects Such As Providing Medical & Educational Aid To Needy Beneficiaries & The Trust Activities Are Genuine & There Is No Contrary Finding To It. Thus The Rejection Order Is Patently Illegal & Golden Charitable Trust [A]

50 years and hence it falls under section 17 of the Registration Act, which needs mandatory registration. However, admittedly assessee has not registered the said lease. Therefore, assessee has violated Registration Act of 1908. 7 Golden Charitable Trust

AIDS SOCIETY OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE

trust has denied to be indulged into any of such alleged transaction in the statement given during the course of search.\n12. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has not pressed the issue challenging the jurisdiction assumed by ld.PCIT. Thus, Grounds of appeal No.1 and 2 raised by the assessee are dismissed as ‘not pressed'.\n13. Now we take

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

charitable religious trust or institution is expected to file auditor’s report along with the return but in cases where for reasons beyond the control of the assessee some delay has occurred in filing the said report, the ITO, for reasons to be recorded, has been authorised to condone the delay in furnishing the auditor’s report and accepting

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

charitable religious trust or institution is expected to file auditor’s report along with the return but in cases where for reasons beyond the control of the assessee some delay has occurred in filing the said report, the ITO, for reasons to be recorded, has been authorised to condone the delay in furnishing the auditor’s report and accepting

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

charitable religious trust or institution is expected to file auditor’s report along with the return but in cases where for reasons beyond the control of the assessee some delay has occurred in filing the said report, the ITO, for reasons to be recorded, has been authorised to condone the delay in furnishing the auditor’s report and accepting

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

charitable religious trust or institution is expected to file auditor’s report along with the return but in cases where for reasons beyond the control of the assessee some delay has occurred in filing the said report, the ITO, for reasons to be recorded, has been authorised to condone the delay in furnishing the auditor’s report and accepting

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

charitable religious trust or institution is expected to file auditor’s report along with the return but in cases where for reasons beyond the control of the assessee some delay has occurred in filing the said report, the ITO, for reasons to be recorded, has been authorised to condone the delay in furnishing the auditor’s report and accepting

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

charitable religious trust or institution is expected to file auditor’s report along with the return but in cases where for reasons beyond the control of the assessee some delay has occurred in filing the said report, the ITO, for reasons to be recorded, has been authorised to condone the delay in furnishing the auditor’s report and accepting

SHRI SWAMI SAMARTH ADHYATMIK SANSHODHAN SANSTHA,AURANGABAD vs. CIT(E), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

50% to 75% objects of the trust are religious in nature then only it could have been said that the objects of the trust are predominantly religious in nature. We find that the objects of the assessee trust as listed out in the trust deed dated 21.04.2010 (pages 26- 52 of the paper book refers) are as under : i. Health

AGRA OBSTETRICAL AND GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,AGRA vs. PCIT, CENTRAL, PUNE

Section 12A of the\nAct and, if so, under which provision of the Act?\n18. Second, when the CIT grants registration certificate under Section\n12A of the Act to the assessee, whether grant of certificate is his quasi\njudicial function and, if so, its effect on exercise of his power of\ncancellation of such grant of registration certificate?\n19. Third

SANTSHRESHTA GAJANAN MAHARAJ SEVABHAVI SANSTHA,BEED vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysantshreshtha Gajajan Maharaj Sevabhavi Sanstha Borisavargao Kasij, Dist. Beed – 431 518 Pan: Aamas 7563 B Appellant Vs. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption) Pune. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Hari Krishan Respondent By : Shri Sardar Singh Meena

section 80G(5) are the conditions which the institution was formed must additionally fulfil so as to be entitled to the approval by the Commissioner. In this case the assessee-trust is established in India and is for a charitable purpose, greatest evidence is that it has got registration u/s 12AA of the Act. It is settled legal position that

SWASTHIYOG PRATISHTHAN,,SANGLI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1296/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Swasthiyog Pratishthan, Vs. Dcit (Exemptions) C/O. Dr. Gs Kulkarni, Circle, Pune. Orthopedic Hospital, Extension Area, Miraj, Sangli- 416410. Pan : Aaats5400L Appellant Respondent

50% of the building owned by him for use of the appellant trust to pursue its charitable objects. Dr. G. S. Kulkarni and his two sons were rendering the voluntarily professional services to the appellant trust without charging any fees. The provisions of section

THE JAIN KASAR SAMAJ SANSTHA,SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is devoid of merits and the\nsame is hereby dismissed

50%. Thus, the assessee trust has failed to establish\nthe charitable nature and the genuineness of its activities.\n7. Considering the above facts discussed in the show-cause notice and\ndiscrepancies noticed, the undersigned is not satisfied about the charitable\nnature and the genuineness of activities of the assessee.\n8. In view of the above, the application filed

THE JAIN KASAR SAMAJ SANSTHA,SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is devoid of merits and the\nsame is hereby dismissed

50%. Thus, the assessee trust has failed to establish\nthe charitable nature and the genuineness of its activities.\n7. Considering the above facts discussed in the show-cause notice and\ndiscrepancies noticed, the undersigned is not satisfied about the charitable\nnature and the genuineness of activities of the assessee.\n8. In view of the above, the application filed

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3),, SOLAPUR vs. SHRI. ULHAS MALLIKARJUN PATIL,, SOLAPUR

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.1751/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, Shri Ulhas Mallikarjun Patil, Ward-2(3), Solapur, Vs Block No.3, Sunandan . Complex, Near Dayanand College, Ravivar Peth, Solapur – 413004. Pan: Akepp 1943 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Krishna V Gujarathi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 05/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 06/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-7, Pune’S Order Dated 31.08.2018 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-7/Wd- 2(3)/10434/2016-147, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

section 50. The appellant also submits that the property which was let to school belongs to the appellant since F.Y. 2007-08. 5.4.1 The appellant also submits that premises were let out for a long period to a charitable trust

SINHAGAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY,PUNE vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoresinhagad Technical Education Society Pcit (Central), Pune Smt. Khilare Marg, Off Karve Road, Vs. Pune – 411004 Pan: Aabts9900Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora & Miss Sampada Ingale Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari - Cit Date Of Hearing : 25-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-05-2025 O R D E R

50 of the paper book, he submitted that the assessee trust applied for registration in Form 10A on 27.11.2021. Referring to pages 12 to 14 of the paper book, he submitted that the registration was granted in Form 10AC by the Ld. PCIT on 31.12.2021. He submitted that the Ld. PCIT issued notice on 23.01.2025 and cancelled the registration vide

THE MUMBAI OBSTETRIC GYNAECOLOGICAL SOCIETY,LOW PAREL (W) vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

charitable\npurposes, if any income thereof during the previous year is used or\napplied, directly or indirectly for the benefit of any person referred to in\nsub-section (3) then the provisions of sections 1land 12 do not apply to\nexclude either whole or any part of the income of such trust or institution.\nFurther subsection (3) of section