SINDHU SEVA SAMITI,SURAT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.214/Srt/2023 (Physical Hearing) Mar Baselius Orthodox Syrian Church, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Ranchhod Nagar, Opp. Magdalla Port Colony, Ahmedabad Dumas Road, Magdalla B.O., Magdalla, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatm3808N (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.265/Srt/2023 (Physical Hearing) Sindhu Seva Samiti, Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Tp No.3 Fp 53, Anand Mahal Road, Ahmedabad Near Sneh Sankul Wadi, Adajan Choryasi, Surat – 395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabts3067J (Appellant) (Respondent)

43 taxmann.com 243, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the provision of section 13(1)(b) of the Act is applicable even to a composite trust/institution and held as under. “45. From the phraseology in clause (b) of section 13(1), it could be inferred that the Legislature intended to include only the trusts established for charitable

SHRI VIDHYASAGAR SANT NIVAS TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

43 taxmann.com 243 (SC) and Co-ordinate Bench decision in the case of Mar Baselius Orthodox Syrian vs. CIT(E) [2023] 156 taxmann.com 548 (Surat-Trib.), Shree Mahavideh Charitable Trust Vs. CIT(E) [2025] 174 taxmann.com 540 (Surat-Trib.), Sunni Muslim Jamat Aamena Madressa Ebdatgah Waqf Committee Vs. CIT(E) [2024] 161 taxmann.com 555 (Surat-Trib.) and Hon’ble High

SHRI VIDHYASAGAR SANT NIVAS TRUST,SURAT vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)

43 taxmann.com 243 (SC) and Co-ordinate Bench decision in the case of Mar Baselius Orthodox Syrian vs. CIT(E) [2023] 156 taxmann.com 548 (Surat-Trib.), Shree Mahavideh Charitable Trust Vs. CIT(E) [2025] 174 taxmann.com 540 (Surat-Trib.), Sunni Muslim Jamat Aamena Madressa Ebdatgah Waqf Committee Vs. CIT(E) [2024] 161 taxmann.com 555 (Surat-Trib.) and Hon’ble High

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

Charitable Trust Vs ITO 31/3/2012 at Rs. 5.00 lacs only, however, in the statement file before him it was shown 13,34,700/-. On the basis of such discrepancies, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has reported (received) fresh donation of Rs. 8,34,700 (13,34,700 – 5,00,000) during the A.Y. 2013-14 which

SHRI BUHARI VIBHAG DASHA SHRIMALI JAIN GNYATI SAMAJ,VALOD, TAPI, SURAT vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHEMDABAD, AHEMADABAD

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Physical Court) Shri Buhari Vibhag Dasha The Commissioner Of Income Shrimali Jain Gnyati Samaj, Tax (Exemptions), Vs. Vaniya Bazar, Buhari, Tal.- Ahmedabad, Room No. 609, Valod, Dist.-Tapi, Floor-6, Aayakar Bhawan Surat-394630. (Vejalpur), Nr. Sachin Tower, Pan: Aaatu 8250 E 100 Foot Road, Anandnagar- Prahladnagar Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Appellant Respondednt

43 taxmann.com 243-SC) held that provision of section 13(1)(d) would be applicable and therefore would not be eligible for exemption under section 11 and registration under section 12AB cannot be granted to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(E), the assessee has filed this appeal before Tribunal. 2 Shri Buhari Vibhag Dasha Shrimali Jain

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

43(3)\nr.w.s. 254 of the Act which is the subject matter of appeal by the assessee.\n5. All the grounds raised by the assessee, though numerous and\narticulated from different legal and factual perspectives, cumulatively\nrevolve around a single core dispute, namely the allowability of the FCP/\nadditional sugarcane price paid over and above the FRP to cane growers

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

43(3)\nr.w.s. 254 of the Act which is the subject matter of appeal by the assessee.\n5.\nAll the grounds raised by the assessee, though numerous and\narticulated from different legal and factual perspectives, cumulatively\nrevolve around a single core dispute, namely the allowability of the FCP/\nadditional sugarcane price paid over and above the FRP to cane growers

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

43(3)\nr.w.s. 254 of the Act which is the subject matter of appeal by the assessee.\n5.\nAll the grounds raised by the assessee, though numerous and\narticulated from different legal and factual perspectives, cumulatively\nrevolve around a single core dispute, namely the allowability of the FCP/\nadditional sugarcane price paid over and above the FRP to cane growers

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

43(3)\nr.w.s. 254 of the Act which is the subject matter of appeal by the assessee.\n5.\nAll the grounds raised by the assessee, though numerous and\narticulated from different legal and factual perspectives, cumulatively\nrevolve around a single core dispute, namely the allowability of the FCP/\nadditional sugarcane price paid over and above the FRP to cane growers

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

43(3)\nr.w.s. 254 of the Act which is the subject matter of appeal by the assessee.\n5. All the grounds raised by the assessee, though numerous and\narticulated from different legal and factual perspectives, cumulatively\nrevolve around a single core dispute, namely the allowability of the FCP/\nadditional sugarcane price paid over and above the FRP to cane growers

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

43(3)\nr.w.s. 254 of the Act which is the subject matter of appeal by the assessee.\n5.\nAll the grounds raised by the assessee, though numerous and\narticulated from different legal and factual perspectives, cumulatively\nrevolve around a single core dispute, namely the allowability of the FCP/\nadditional sugarcane price paid over and above the FRP to cane growers

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

43(3)\nr.w.s. 254 of the Act which is the subject matter of appeal by the assessee.\n5. All the grounds raised by the assessee, though numerous and\narticulated from different legal and factual perspectives, cumulatively\nrevolve around a single core dispute, namely the allowability of the FCP/\nadditional sugarcane price paid over and above the FRP to cane growers

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

43(3)\nr.w.s. 254 of the Act which is the subject matter of appeal by the assessee.\n5. All the grounds raised by the assessee, though numerous and\narticulated from different legal and factual perspectives, cumulatively\nrevolve around a single core dispute, namely the allowability of the FCP/\nadditional sugarcane price paid over and above the FRP to cane growers

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

ABHYUTHTHAN GRAM VIKAS MANDAL,SURAT vs. CIT EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue, both are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Charitable Trust registered with the State Charity Commissioner, undertook irrigation projects awarded by Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. During assessment, the Assessing Officer treated the activities of the assessee as business u/s 2(15) and denied exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The Assessing Officer invoked Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Act alleging interest-free

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-SURAT, SURAT vs. ABHYUTHTHAN GRAM VIKAS MANDAL, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the Revenue, both are dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Charitable Trust registered with the State Charity Commissioner, undertook irrigation projects awarded by Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. During assessment, the Assessing Officer treated the activities of the assessee as business u/s 2(15) and denied exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The Assessing Officer invoked Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Act alleging interest-free

SIR P.T. SARVAJANIK COLLEGE OF SCIENCE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION,SURAT vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

1)(ac)(iii) in Form 10AB, compliance of show cause notice dated 13.06.2024 and provisional approval under clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act. He relied on the decisions in the cases of (i) CIT vs. Dawoodi Bohara Jamat, 43 taxmann.com 243 (SC), (ii) CIT(E) vs. Jamiatul Bannat Tankaria, 168 taxmann.com

SIR P.T. SARVAJANIK COLLEGE OF SCIENCE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION,SURAT vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

1)(ac)(iii) in Form 10AB, compliance of show cause notice dated 13.06.2024 and provisional approval under clause (iv) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act. He relied on the decisions in the cases of (i) CIT vs. Dawoodi Bohara Jamat, 43 taxmann.com 243 (SC), (ii) CIT(E) vs. Jamiatul Bannat Tankaria, 168 taxmann.com

GREEN MUMBAY LIONS EDUCATION TRUST,NA vs. ARIVS.EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT, INCOME-TAX OFFICE SURAT

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

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.547/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2023-24) (Hybrid Hearing) Green Mumbay Lions Education Vs. Ito, Trust, Exemption Ward, Opp – Ratnakar Society, C/O Sgm Surat Shiroya English School, Chhapra Road, Navsari - 396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aatg8361Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Bhupendra Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2025

43,78,990/- 2) To quash adjustment made u/s 143[1][a] 3) To delete interest u/s 234A B C” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a public charitable trust. It filed return of income for AY 2023-24 on 21.10.2023, declaring Nil total income after claiming exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The assessee