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

section 12 of the Act by rejecting such condonation application, but an assessee, a public charitable trust past 30 years who substantially satisfies the condition for availing such exemption, should not be denied the same merely on the bar of limitation especially when the legislature has conferred wide discretionary powers to condone such delay on the authorities concerned

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

section 12 of the Act by rejecting such condonation application, but an assessee, a public charitable trust past 30 years who substantially satisfies the condition for availing such exemption, should not be denied the same merely on the bar of limitation especially when the legislature has conferred wide discretionary powers to condone such delay on the authorities concerned

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

section 12 of the Act by rejecting such condonation application, but an assessee, a public charitable trust past 30 years who substantially satisfies the condition for availing such exemption, should not be denied the same merely on the bar of limitation especially when the legislature has conferred wide discretionary powers to condone such delay on the authorities concerned

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)

36 of paper book and (ix) Acknowledgement of ITR for AY 22-23 pg-37 of paper book. 11. Based on these above noted evidences, Ld. Counsel argued that it is a sufficient compliance, if the assessee filed the Form No. 10B during the assessment stage and for that ld Counsel relied on the following judgments:  CIT vs. Mayur Foundation

SHREE HARI RAM CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. ITO EXEMPTION , SURAT

In the result, the appeal of assessee is treated as dismissed being infructuous

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Shree Hari Ram Charitable Trust, I.T.O.(Exemptions), 304, Meghdhanush Complex, Ward-Surat. Vs. Adajan Patia, Adajan Surat, Gujarat, India- 395009. Pan No. Aajts 1057 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

36,927/- claimed u/s 11(1)(A) of the Act.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust having registration under Section

SEERVI SAMAJ GUJRAT,SURAT vs. CIT(E), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O. P. Meena

trust cited in the constitution and all the activities mentioned were charitable in nature. The CIT(E) need not to go in detail to verify the activities at the time of grant of Recognize under section 80G of the Act and he has to see only whether any object is against charitable purpose. The Ld. CIT(E) has wrongly clarified

SHRI SAIBABA PARIVAR TRUST,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTION WARD), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Shri Saibaba Parivar Trust Income Tax Officer C/O Rasiklal Chhaganabhai (Exemption Ward) Vs Patel,Bangi Falia, Aaykar Bhavan, Mitha Kuva, Billimora, Majura Gate, Gandevi, Navsari Surat Pan : Aaits 2172 H Assessee / Appellant Revenue /Respondent

charitable objects. The assessee is registered under provision of Bombay Public Trust Act, vide registration dated 24.08.2007. The assessee filed his return of income for assessment year (AY) 2013-14 declaring total of Rs.1,36,994/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment completed under section

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

charitable objectives and (iii) section 80G(5B) caps the proportion of religious expenditure to 5% of total receipts. 7.1 On perusal of the objects of the assessee-trust as stipulated in the instrument of creation of the trust, it is observed that they are religious in nature. These objects are reproduced as under: "....(a) To celebrate the Ganpati Utsav. Further

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

36(1)(xvii) and section 155(19) of the Act, which reflect the legislative intention to treat Government approved cane price as allowable business expenditure. The AR submitted that these provisions, read with CBDT Circular No. 18/2021 and the subsequent modification vide Finance Act, 2023, demonstrate that the legislature recognizes that cane price fixed under cooperative governance norms is allowable

SAHADARI KHAND UDYOG MANDAL LTD.,,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

36(1)(xvii) and section 155(19) of the Act, which reflect the legislative intention to treat Government approved cane price as allowable business expenditure. The AR submitted that these provisions, read with CBDT Circular No. 18/2021 and the subsequent modification vide Finance Act, 2023, demonstrate that the legislature recognizes that cane price fixed under cooperative governance norms is allowable

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

36(1)(xvii) and section 155(19) of the Act, which reflect the legislative intention to treat Government approved cane price as allowable business expenditure. The AR submitted that these provisions, read with CBDT Circular No. 18/2021 and the subsequent modification vide Finance Act, 2023, demonstrate that the legislature recognizes that cane price fixed under cooperative governance norms is allowable

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

36(1)(xvii) and section 155(19) of the Act, which reflect the legislative intention to treat Government approved cane price as allowable business expenditure. The AR submitted that these provisions, read with CBDT Circular No. 18/2021 and the subsequent modification vide Finance Act, 2023, demonstrate that the legislature recognizes that cane price fixed under cooperative governance norms is allowable

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

36(1)(xvii) and section 155(19) of the Act, which reflect the legislative intention to treat Government approved cane price as allowable business expenditure. The AR submitted that these provisions, read with CBDT Circular No. 18/2021 and the subsequent modification vide Finance Act, 2023, demonstrate that the legislature recognizes that cane price fixed under cooperative governance norms is allowable

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijyananda Pruseth

36(1)(xvii) and section 155(19) of the Act, which reflect the legislative intention to treat Government approved cane price as allowable business expenditure. The AR submitted that these provisions, read with CBDT Circular No. 18/2021 and the subsequent modification vide Finance Act, 2023, demonstrate that the legislature recognizes that cane price fixed under cooperative governance norms is allowable

PAREEK VIKAS TRUST-SURAT,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

charitable in nature are for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste "Pareek caste". ITA No.393 & 394/SRT/2025 Pareek Vikas Trust v. CIT(E) 6. Aggrieved by the impugned order both dated 07.03.2023 and 10.03.2023 of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. At the outset, that the appeal (ITA No. 393/Srt/2025) filed late

PAREEK VIKAS TRUST-SURAT,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

charitable in nature are for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste "Pareek caste". ITA No.393 & 394/SRT/2025 Pareek Vikas Trust v. CIT(E) 6. Aggrieved by the impugned order both dated 07.03.2023 and 10.03.2023 of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. At the outset, that the appeal (ITA No. 393/Srt/2025) filed late

KETAN N. SHAH (HUF) ,VAPI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, VAPI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Bleआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.321/Srt/2018,िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Virtual Court) Ketan N. Shah (Huf), Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.275, Usha Hospital & Life Ward -5, Vapi. Science Charitable Trust, Near Cine Park, Chanod, Vapi – 396195. [Pan: Aahhk 4703 R] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Hardikvora– Ar िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Smt. Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 20.10.2020 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 20.10.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Pawan Singh, Judical Memebr: 1. This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1 [“Cit(A)” ], Valsad, State Of Gujarat,Dated 27.03.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013-14.This Appeal Was Initially Adjudicated Vide Order Dated 31.07.2019. However, The Order Was Recalled Vide Order Dated 02.01.2020 In Ma No.59/Srt/2019, Thus, In The Aforesaid Background, The Appeal Was Heard Afresh.The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Charitable Trust, Near Cine Park, Chanod, Vapi – 396195. [PAN: AAHHK 4703 R] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri HardikVora– AR िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Smt. Anupama Singla – Sr.DR राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date of hearing: 20.10.2020 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement on: 20.10.2020 आदेश /O R D E R PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICAL MEMEBR: 1. This

SHREE SAYAN VIBHAG SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDLI LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(4),, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1735 & 1740/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2008-09) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Sayan Vibhag Sahakari Khand Vs. The Ito, Ward-5(4), Udyog Mandli Ltd., Surat. At & Post Sayan, Tal: Olpad, Dist: Surat-395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaas4058F (Assessee) (Respondent) Shri Kamrej Vibhag Sahakari Khand Vs. The Ito, Ward-5(4), Udyog Khand Mandli Ltd., Surat. N.H. No.8, Navi Pardi, Tal: Kamrej, Dist: Surat, Surat-395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaas4817N (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sita Ram Meena, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 25/02/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2008-09, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

Charitable Trust Fund of Rs.12,58,283/- 1735 & 1740/AHD/2015/AY.2008-09 Kamrej Vibhag Sahakari & Sayan Vibhag Khand Udyog The total amount credited to these above funds was Rs.50,33,133/-. The assessing officer treated Rs.50,33,133/- as income of the assessee and added to the total income of the assessee. The assessing officer also held that assessee has consciously and deliberately