BARDOLI VIBHAG GRAM VIKAS CREDIT SOCIETY ,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

PATHRADIA GRAM VIKAS MANDAL TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

SHREE RAM KABIR MANDIR TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

PATIDAR SAMAJ,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

SARDAR PATEL VIDYA SANKUL,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

SARDAR VALLABHBHAI PATEL EDUCATION SOCIETY,BARDOLI vs. CIT(EXEMTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

BAJIPURA GRAM VIKASH TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

SHREE PALWADA KELVANI MANDAL,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

SHAMBHUBHAI PATEL CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

SURAT EDUCATION SOCIETY,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethsl.

38 of 2020)], within three months from the first day of April, 2021; (ii) where the trust or institution is registered under section 12AB or approved under sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10 and the period of the said registration or approval, as the case

LOK BHARTI MANDAL,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.212/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Physical Hearing) Lok Bharati Mandal, Vs. The Ito, Bharatia Vidhya Sankul, Opp. Terapanthi (Exemption) Ward, Bhavan, City Light Ropad, Surat. Surat – 395007. (Assessee) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatl2524Q Assessee By Shri Hiren Vepari, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 04/05/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 16/06/2023

section 11(1)(d) of the Act of Rs.51,38,851/- received as earmarked funds, being corpus donation. ITA 212/SRT/2023/AY.2008-09 Lok Bharti Mandal 5. The facts necessary for disposal of the appeal are stated in brief. During the course of re-assessment proceedings, it was observed by the assessing officer that assessee had reported total additions of Rs.51,38

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

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

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

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

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

charitable trust.\n(vi) That the appellant could not prove that a higher price was paid by\nit to the farmers on account of higher yield or some other factors.\nBesides nowhere it has been claimed that at the time of supply of\nsugarcane by the farmers to the appellant, any agreement or contract\n25\nfor payment of price higher

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

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

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

MAROLI VIBHAG KHAND UDYOG SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD,.,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, , NAVSARI

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the result, all the appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated\nhereinbefore

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

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