SHREE KHEDUT SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDLI LTD.,BARDOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARDOLI

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

charitable trust. (vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by it to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors. Besides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of sugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract 25 for payment of price higher than

SHRI RAM EDUCATION & GRAMINVIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST,VALSAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTION WARD), SURAT

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainishri Ram Education & I.T.O., (Exemption Ward) Graminvikas Charitable Trust, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Jauagauri Park, Hathikhana, Majura Gate, Dharampur, Surat. Valsad-396050. Pan No. Aalts 324 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

1,40,21,342/- and most of the expenses were incurred in cash without furnishing books of account, original bills, vouchers etc. The Assessing Officer recorded that most of the expenses were in cash only, like labour expenses of Rs. 25,20,200/- were completely in cash with self-made vouchers and that too without mentioned name of the payees

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, , VAPI vs. M/S MAHAVIR JAIN CHARITABLE TRUST, VALSAD

In the result, the grounds of Revenue’s appeal are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.208/Srt/2023 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Mahavir Jain Income-Tax, Central Circle-Vapi, Charitable Trust, 410/411, Vs 9Th Floor, Fortune Square Ii, Amar Chambers, Station Daman Road, Chala, Vapi- Road, Opp. Lal School, 396191 Valsad-396001 Pan No. Aamts 6784 K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

1 to 2 on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Office ignoring the principles of “Human Probability Test” i.e., preponderance of probabilities which is applicable for Income Tax proceedings. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case

S M K R VASHI HIGH SCHOOL,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.515/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Physical Court Hearing) S.M.K.R Vashi High School Income Tax Officer-Exemption Ward, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Umbhrat Road Maroli Bazar, Vs. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Jalalpore Navsari-396436 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalfs 0980 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

1). This Court in the said order has observed that the approach of the authority in these type of cases should be equitable, balancing and judicious. Technically speaking, respondent No. 2 might be justified in denying the exemption under section 11 of the Act by rejecting such condonation application, but an assessee, which is a public charitable trust for past

ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD, SURAT vs. GUJARAT HIRA BOURSE, SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

trust ( A section 25 company, as per old Companies Act, 1956), is charitable institution or not. We note that in the instant case the assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed on 28.03.2013 determining total income at Rs.3,54,82,267/- by making following additions: (i) Amount applied to Charitable Purpose treated as business income

ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD, SURAT vs. GUJARAT HIRA BOURSE, SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue (in ITA No

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

trust ( A section 25 company, as per old Companies Act, 1956), is charitable institution or not. We note that in the instant case the assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed on 28.03.2013 determining total income at Rs.3,54,82,267/- by making following additions: (i) Amount applied to Charitable Purpose treated as business income

NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

1) of the Act. Thus, the assessee was not eligible for exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) has passed a very reasoned order, which may be affirmed. 6. I have considered the submissions of ld. CIT-DR for the revenue and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. I have carefully

NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

1) of the Act. Thus, the assessee was not eligible for exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) has passed a very reasoned order, which may be affirmed. 6. I have considered the submissions of ld. CIT-DR for the revenue and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. I have carefully

NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

1) of the Act. Thus, the assessee was not eligible for exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) has passed a very reasoned order, which may be affirmed. 6. I have considered the submissions of ld. CIT-DR for the revenue and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. I have carefully

SOUTHERN GUJARAT CHAMBER TRADE & INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT CENTRE,,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, SURAT

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini ()

1) and 143(2) proceeded for assessment. On verification of computation of income, the Assessing Officer found that assessee-trust derived income as interest on deposits in banks and also received contribution from Sar Infracon Private Limited. The contribution was received on account of letting out of its convention centre for organizing exhibitions and other function. On further verification

NA vs. ARI MALESAR BEHDIN ANJUMAN,NAVSARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.336/Srt/2023 (Ay 2013-14) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navsari Malesar Behdin Income Tax Officer, (Exemption) Ward, Room Anjuman, Agary Street, Vs No.105, 1St Floor, Anavil Malesar, Business Centre, Aayakar Navsari-396445 Bhavan, Adajan Hazira Road, Pan No. Aaatn 6124 C Adajan, Surat-395007 ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

25 months. 8. We find that assessee has filed copy of screenshot of the inbox of email of omconsultancy1963@yahoo.com, on careful perusal of such screenshot, we find that it shows only mail received from surat.ito.exem@incometax.gov.in is about the show cause notice and there is no mail regarding order under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. We find that

NA vs. ARI MALESAR BEHDIN ANJUMAN,NAVSARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P.Meena, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.272/Srt/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Navsari Malesar Behdin Anjuman, V The Income Tax Officer, Agiary Street, Malesar, Navsari S Exemption Ward, Surat. Taluka, Navsari – 396 445. . [Pan: Aaatn 6124 C] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri H.R.Vepari – Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Shri O.P.Vaishav – Cit - Dr

25-2-2013 12AA registration granted The Tribunal held that first proviso to section 12A(2) had retrospective operation. Further it held that considering the decision of Shree BhanushaliMitraMandal Trust (Ahmedabad Tribunal)(68-taxmann.com-250), the appellant proceedings before the appellate authorities are deemed to be assessment proceedings pending before the A.O. Also, it held that subsequent grant of registration u/s.12A

HALIMA ADAMJI MEDICAL AND EDUCATION CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT, (EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.764/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2025-26 (Hybrid Hearing) Halima Adamji Medical & Cit (Exemption), Ahmedabad बनाम/ Education Charitable Trust Vs. Office No. 1, Ground Floor, Halima Apartment, New Rander Road, Surat-395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaath 6553 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant By Shri Sapnesh R. Sheth, Ca राज"वक" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Abhishek Gautam, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 23/09/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025

Charitable Trust Vs. Office No. 1, Ground Floor, Halima Apartment, New Rander Road, Surat-395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAATH 6553 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant by Shri Sapnesh R. Sheth, CA राज"वक" ओर से /Respondent by Shri Abhishek Gautam, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 23/09/2025 उ"घोषणा

ACIT, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE., NAVSARIVS.M/S. MAROLI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,, NAVASARI

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

25-09-2021 fixing the date of hearing on 27-09- 2021 i.e. just one day before the date of passing the order and hence, the whole assessment proceedings being carried out in pure violation of principle of natural justice (audi alteram partem), is without jurisdiction, bad in law, void ab initio, illegal, unjustified and hence, the assessment order

ACIT, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE, NAVSARIVS.M/S. MAROLI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,, NAVSARI

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

25-09-2021 fixing the date of hearing on 27-09- 2021 i.e. just one day before the date of passing the order and hence, the whole assessment proceedings being carried out in pure violation of principle of natural justice (audi alteram partem), is without jurisdiction, bad in law, void ab initio, illegal, unjustified and hence, the assessment order

SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDAL LTD.,,GANDEVI vs. ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

25-09-2021 fixing the date of hearing on 27-09- 2021 i.e. just one day before the date of passing the order and hence, the whole assessment proceedings being carried out in pure violation of principle of natural justice (audi alteram partem), is without jurisdiction, bad in law, void ab initio, illegal, unjustified and hence, the assessment order

ACIT, NA vs. ARI CIRCLE, NAVSARIVS.M/S. MAROLI VIBHAG, KAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD., NAVSARI

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

25-09-2021 fixing the date of hearing on 27-09- 2021 i.e. just one day before the date of passing the order and hence, the whole assessment proceedings being carried out in pure violation of principle of natural justice (audi alteram partem), is without jurisdiction, bad in law, void ab initio, illegal, unjustified and hence, the assessment order

SAHAKARI KHAND UDUOG MANDAL LTD.,NA vs. ARIVS.DCIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

25-09-2021 fixing the date of hearing on 27-09- 2021 i.e. just one day before the date of passing the order and hence, the whole assessment proceedings being carried out in pure violation of principle of natural justice (audi alteram partem), is without jurisdiction, bad in law, void ab initio, illegal, unjustified and hence, the assessment order