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

8. The appellant trust craves liberty to add, alter, amend, modify, substitute or delete any grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing if necessity arises.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a public charitable trust registered under Public Trust Act, Mumbai. The assessee is engaged in imparting education. The assessee is also having

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

8. The appellant trust craves liberty to add, alter, amend, modify, substitute or delete any grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing if necessity arises.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a public charitable trust registered under Public Trust Act, Mumbai. The assessee is engaged in imparting education. The assessee is also having

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

8. The appellant trust craves liberty to add, alter, amend, modify, substitute or delete any grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing if necessity arises.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a public charitable trust registered under Public Trust Act, Mumbai. The assessee is engaged in imparting education. The assessee is also having

JAYSHRI GOPALLAL MAHARAJSHRINI SURAT SRUSTI TRUST,SURAT vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

charitable trust registered under section 12A of the Act. An intimation was issued by the CPC under section 143(1) of the Act, in which the amount claimed by the assessee as application of income and accumulation of income was disallowed and gross receipts of the assessee trust were taxed in the hands of the assessee. The reason for such

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

8 ITA No.189 & 190/SRT/2020 (A.Ys.14-15 &17-18) Gujarat Hira Bourse institution established for charitable purpose and its objects were for the advancement of other objects of general public utility within the meaning of section 2(15) of the I.T. Act. The reference is also invited to the decision of Mumbai I.T.A.T. in the case of Bharat Diamond Bourse

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

8 ITA No.189 & 190/SRT/2020 (A.Ys.14-15 &17-18) Gujarat Hira Bourse institution established for charitable purpose and its objects were for the advancement of other objects of general public utility within the meaning of section 2(15) of the I.T. Act. The reference is also invited to the decision of Mumbai I.T.A.T. in the case of Bharat Diamond Bourse

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)

25 of paper book (vi) Audit report in Form 10BB obtained u/s 12A(b), vide pg-26 to 29 of paper book (vii) Intimation u/s 143(1)(a) dated 01.07.2022 and response made to intimation, vide pg. 30-31 of paper book, (viii) Audit report in Form 10B obtained u/s 12A(b) AY 22-23, vide

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

SHRI SARVAJAINK GANPATI USTAV FUND HIRA MENTION NA vs. ARI,NAVSARIVS.CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1273/Srt/2024 (Hybrid Hearing) Sri Sarvajaink Ganpati Ustav Commissioner Of Income-Tax बनाम/ Fund Hira Mention Navsari, (Exemption), Ahmedabad-380 014 Vs. Hira Mention Chawl, Vijalpore Road, Siddhivinayak Road, Navsari-396 445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aacts 3822 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, Ca राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 15/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 25/08/2025

b) To undertake religious activity like worship of God, Bhajan Kirtan, Celebration, holy lecture and circulation, etc. To organize Katha, Holy discussion, Bhajan Kirtan, Yagna, Perpetual Dhuni, Holy get together, Meditation, Fitness school, etc. for absolute development for mankind........." 7.2 On perusal of the accounts submitted by the assessee-trust, it is observed that expenditure on religious activities exceeded

BILIMORA DHIVAR PYNCH SAMST,BILIMORA vs. CIT(EXEMOP.), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Sainia.Y:- N.A. (Hearing In Virtual Court) Bilimora Dhivar Pynch Samst, The Commissioner Of Income Badal Falia, Bilimora. Tax(Exemption), Ahmedabad. Vs Pan: Aabtb 6190 M Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

25 are pending. The assessee filed its reply dated 27.10.2017, thus, the assessee completed all the requirements as per notices issued by ld.CIT(E). The ld.CIT(E) rejected the application by taking view that in absence of Trust Deed, the object and activities could not be verified. 4. The ld.AR for the assessee submits that Trust is in existence since

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

25-09-2021 fixing the date of hearing on 27-09- 4 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

SAHADARI KHAND UDYOG MANDAL LTD.,,NA vs. ARIVS.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 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

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

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 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 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

SANJAYKUMAR TIKAMCHAND BUCHA,SURAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), SURAT

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

Bench: Shri T. R Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.647/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) Shri Sanjaykumar Tikamchand Bucha, Vs. Acit, 521, Goodluck Market, Ring Road, Circle – 1(2), Surat, Gujarat - 395002 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abqpb9320F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashish Pophare, Cit -Dr Date Of Hearing 30/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/08/2025

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘in short, the Act’) dated 06.02.2024 by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad [in short “the CIT(A)”] for the assessment year (AY) 2013-14. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well