BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

36 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai97Delhi92Mumbai76Kolkata57Ahmedabad50Bangalore45Raipur44Pune36Hyderabad35Jaipur34Visakhapatnam13Surat12Rajkot9Chandigarh6Lucknow5Indore5Amritsar5Nagpur4Jodhpur3Cuttack3Guwahati3Agra3Patna3Calcutta2Telangana2Varanasi2Cochin2Karnataka2Orissa1Jabalpur1SC1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 12A100Section 80G(5)38Section 80G30Exemption27Section 12A(1)(ac)22Section 10A17Section 8013Section 80I12Section 1011Deduction

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIR 1(1), PUNE vs. EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose in above terms

ITA 42/PUN/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos.42 & 43/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 16-17 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. M/S.Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs Cluster C Wing-1, Eon Zone, Midc Kharadi, Knowledge Park, Plot No.1, Survey No.77, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Pan: Aabce 4323 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vishal Kalra & Shri Ss Tomar -Ar Revenue By Shri Sunil Kumar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: These Revenue’S Twin Appeals For The Assessment Years 2015- 16 & 2016-17 Arise Against The Cit(A)-13, Pune’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 29.05.2020, Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/02, Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle- 1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/03 Respectively, Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused.

Section 10Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80ISection 9(1)(vi)

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2

8
Addition to Income8
Condonation of Delay8

Delay of 32 days in filing of these appeals stands condoned since falling under Covid-19 pandemic outbreak period. ITA Nos.42 & 43/PUN/2021 for A.Y’s: 2015-16 & 16-17 DCIT Vs. M/s.Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., (R) 3. The Revenue’s former appeal ITA No.42/PUN/2021 for the A.Y. 2015-16 raises the following substantive grounds: “1. The order

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIR 1(1), PUNE vs. EATON TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose in above terms

ITA 43/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita Nos.42 & 43/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 16-17 Dcit, Circle-1(1), Pune. M/S.Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs Cluster C Wing-1, Eon Zone, Midc Kharadi, Knowledge Park, Plot No.1, Survey No.77, Kharadi, Pune – 411014. Pan: Aabce 4323 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vishal Kalra & Shri Ss Tomar -Ar Revenue By Shri Sunil Kumar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: These Revenue’S Twin Appeals For The Assessment Years 2015- 16 & 2016-17 Arise Against The Cit(A)-13, Pune’S Separate Orders; Both Dated 29.05.2020, Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle-1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/02, Pn/Cit(A)-13/Dcit, Circle- 1(2), Pune/10142/2019-20/03 Respectively, Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused.

Section 10Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80ISection 9(1)(vi)

Delay of 32 days in filing of these appeals stands condoned since falling under Covid-19 pandemic outbreak period. ITA Nos.42 & 43/PUN/2021 for A.Y’s: 2015-16 & 16-17 DCIT Vs. M/s.Eaton Technologies Pvt. Ltd., (R) 3. The Revenue’s former appeal ITA No.42/PUN/2021 for the A.Y. 2015-16 raises the following substantive grounds: “1. The order

ARUN AASHRAY ,PUNE vs. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 73/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraarun Aashray The Cit (Exemption), 1541 Clover Highlands, Near Pune Vs. Nibm, Pisoli Road, Kondhwa, Pune – 411048 Pan: Aacta2725Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Mutha Department By : Shri Prashant Gadekar Date Of Hearing : 15-04-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil MuthaFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar
Section 10Section 10(230)Section 119Section 80Section 80GSection 80G(5)

section 80G(5) of the Act, it is evident that the time limits prescribed therein are mandatory and the Commissioner of Income Tax has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form No.10AB. The said legal position further gets fortified by the fact that the CBDT on multiple occasions had extended the time limit in filing

DECCAN GYMKHANA,PUNE vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 444/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Sharad A Vaze &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

10A in case of an application under clause (1) of the first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 or under sub-clause (1) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A or under clause (i) of the first proviso to sub-section (5)of section 80G of the Act, till 30/09/2023 where the due date for making

DECCAN GYMKHANA,DECCAN vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1554/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Sharad A Vaze &For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

10A in case of an application under clause (1) of the first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 or under sub-clause (1) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A or under clause (i) of the first proviso to sub-section (5)of section 80G of the Act, till 30/09/2023 where the due date for making

KALYAN CHARITY TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT (EXEMP), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 946/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

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

For Appellant: Shri S.M. BandiFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 80Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

10A under various section, upto 30/09/2023 and also extended the time limit for filing of application in form No.10AB, only in case of application under clause (iii) of first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 and under sub-clause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act, up to 30/09/2023. Thus, no further

CENTURY RAYON EDUCATION SOCIETY,PUNE vs. CIT (EXEMP), PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 947/PUN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

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

For Appellant: Shri S.M. BandiFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 13(3)Section 36ASection 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

10A under various section, upto 30/09/2023 and also extended the time limit for filing of application in form No.10AB, only in case of application under clause (iii) of first proviso to clause (23C) of section 10 and under sub-clause (iii) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Act, up to 30/09/2023. Thus, no further

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 1(1), , PUNE vs. M/S CAPEGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES I LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS IGAGE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD), PUNE

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 41/PUN/2021[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.41/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Dy.Cit, Circle-1(1), M/S.Capegemini Technology Pune. Vs Services India Ltd., (Formerly . Known As Igate Global Solutions Ltd., ) Plot No.114, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjewadi, Phase- Iii, Midc Sez, Pune – 411057. Pan: Aabcm 4573 E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Ch Naniwadekar– Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe –Dr Date Of Hearing 24/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Appeals For A.Y.2005-06 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune’S Order, Dated 09.03.2020 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-1/Dcit Circ.1(1)/77/2013-14/38, Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act [In Short “The Act”].

Section 1Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 1O

10A is not an exhaustive provision and it has been further elaborated in sub-section (4) to mean the amount which bears to the profits of the business of the undertaking, the same proportion as the export turnover in respect of such articles or things or computer software bears to the total turnover of the business carried

SKYLINE DEVELOPERS,PUNE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD4(50, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 709/PUN/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.709/Pun/2023 Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80I

condone the delay of 21 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer erred in assessing the appellant income at Rs.11,61,57,413 by passing

TARACHAND GUPTA FOUNDATION,NASHIK vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 935/PUN/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.935 & 936/Pun/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 5Section 80G(5)

condonation of delay has been filed by the appellant explaining the reasons which led to delay in filing the appeals and the same read as under: “1. I say that the Trust was established on 18 March 2005 vide Registration number F/8415 granted by the Charity Commissioner Registry of Trust Officer. 2. I say that the trust is registered

TARACHAND GUPTA FOUNDATION,NASHIK vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 936/PUN/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.935 & 936/Pun/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 5Section 80G(5)

condonation of delay has been filed by the appellant explaining the reasons which led to delay in filing the appeals and the same read as under: “1. I say that the Trust was established on 18 March 2005 vide Registration number F/8415 granted by the Charity Commissioner Registry of Trust Officer. 2. I say that the trust is registered

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 8(2),, PUNE vs. JAGTAP PATIL PROMOTERS & BUILDERS ,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is Allowed

ITA 35/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.35/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Income Tax Officer, Jagtap Patil Promoters & Ward-8(2), Pune. Vs Builders, S.No.152, Pimple Gurav, Pune – 411061. Pan: Aagfj 0403 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suniol Ganoo – Ar Revenue By Shri M.M.Chate – Dr Date Of Hearing 29/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24/11/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue I.E. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Pune For The A.Y. 2014-15 Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A)- 6, Pune Dated 04.10.2017 Emanating From The Assessment Order Dated 30/12/2016 Passed By The Ito Ward 8(2) Pune U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Not Appreciating That It Was Only After Scrutiny Proceedings Started That The Assessee Paid The Mat. Thus By Filing Nil Return & Not Claiming Deduction U/S 80Ib(10) The Assessee Was Trying To Evade Payment Of Taxes. The Claim Of The Assessee That Filing Of Nil Return Was Clerical Error Does Not Hold Ground? 2. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Not Appreciating The Ratio Laid

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 80ASection 80I

10A or Section 10AA or Section 10B or Section 10BA or under any provision of the said Chapter - VI A under the heading "C.-Deduction in respect of certain incomes", no deduction would be allowed to him under the said provision. In plain terms, this Sub Section (5) of Section 80A of the Act imposes an additional condition for claim

SOLAPUR DIST M S K SAMITI H MASTER T AND N T PATH MYDT PANDHARPUR,PANDHARPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2, PANDHARPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 804/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.804/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Solapur Dist M S K Samiti H The Income Tax Officer, Master T & N T Path V Ward-2, Pandharapur. Mydtpandharpur, S 3980, Station Road, Pandharpur. Maharashtra – 413304. Pan: Aanas9890E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2024 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(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 11.05.2023 Emanating From Assessment Order Dated 30.07.2019Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S 144A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Assessee Was In Presumption That Co Operative Societies Income Is Exempt Under 80P Generally Maximum Co Solapur Dist M S K Samiti H Master T & N T Path Mydt Pandharpur [A]

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 250Section 80Section 80ASection 80PSection 8OSection 8Q

condoned, 2. The provisions of Section 8OA (5) of the Act are directory and not mandatory and therefore deduction under Section MOP cannot be denied by making the provision section 80A (5) of the Act We relied upon decision of ITAT Delhi in case of the Fibre fill Engineers Vs. CIT (2017) 177 TTJ 556 (Del.) wherein it was held

DNYANESHWAR SHINDE,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1) , AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1726/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Prashant GhumareFor Respondent: Shri Harish Bist
Section 10Section 147

condoned the delay considering that the delay was not inordinate and it was owing to the severe illness of the Chartered Accountant of the assessee who was handling the case of the assessee as stated in the affidavit of the assessee. So far as, the merits of the case is concerned, we find that the impugned issue is squarely covered

INSTITUTE FOR MULTI-LINGUAL EDUCATION (IMLI),PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2732/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Nov 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

10A, Wing B1, Indraprabha Housing Society, Kiwale, Dehu Road, Ravet, Pune 412101, Maharashtra PAN : AABTI7414D Appellant Respondent Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Amol Khairnar Date of hearing : 11.11.2025 Date of pronouncement : 13.11.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeals at the instance of appellant are against the rejection of applications for regular registration u/s.12AB

INSTITUTE FOR MULTI-LINGUAL EDUCATION (IMLI),PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2731/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Nov 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

10A, Wing B1, Indraprabha Housing Society, Kiwale, Dehu Road, Ravet, Pune 412101, Maharashtra PAN : AABTI7414D Appellant Respondent Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Amol Khairnar Date of hearing : 11.11.2025 Date of pronouncement : 13.11.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeals at the instance of appellant are against the rejection of applications for regular registration u/s.12AB

THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE,,AURANGABAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1363/PUN/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir TaoriFor Respondent: Shri Sardar Singh Meena
Section 12ASection 154

condonation request for reasons explained below. 3. That the matter was clear case of wrong facts recorded on the order and was referred for rectification under section 154 of Income Tax Act with Hon. CIT on 25/02/2007 well before the date due for filing the appeal. 4. That the applicant despite being a Semi Government Organization has paid

CASP COUNCIL FOR ARTS AND SOCIAL PRACTICE,KHARGHAR, NAVI MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 411/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

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

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj C Chag (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

delay in filing of the appeals is condoned and both the appeals are admitted for adjudication. 5. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed an application in Form No.10AB on 30.09.2022 for registration of the trust under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. With a view to verify the genuineness

CASP COUNCIL FOR ARTS AND SOCIAL PRACTICE,NAVI MUMBAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 410/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

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

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj C Chag (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

delay in filing of the appeals is condoned and both the appeals are admitted for adjudication. 5. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed an application in Form No.10AB on 30.09.2022 for registration of the trust under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act. With a view to verify the genuineness

SH DASHANEMA MANGAL KARYALAYA MANDAL,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/PUN/2021[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Aug 2022

Bench: Covid-19 Pandemic Outbreak Period. Therefore, He Strongly Objected For Condonation Of This Delay.

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Hitendra B. Ninawe
Section 11Section 12ASection 13

delay was covering pandemic outbreak period, we condone the same and the case is heard on merits. 3. The brief facts are that the assessee is a charitable trust and is formed vide trust deed dated 26-11-1952. The trust is engaged in the activities relating to organizing religious and social service activities. Many people are benefited from food