BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

36 results for “charitable trust”+ Section 10(22)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi642Mumbai569Karnataka479Chennai352Bangalore307Ahmedabad188Jaipur176Pune156Hyderabad128Chandigarh99Kolkata93Lucknow68Cuttack48Amritsar46Indore43Visakhapatnam36Cochin34Rajkot28Surat27Allahabad27Nagpur24Telangana19Raipur18Calcutta16Jodhpur16Agra15SC12Ranchi7Patna6Dehradun6Punjab & Haryana6Kerala5Panaji4Varanasi4Rajasthan3Andhra Pradesh2Himachal Pradesh2Guwahati1T.S. THAKUR ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 12A31Section 234E31Section 200A21Section 14716Exemption16Section 1115Section 143(3)14Section 14814Addition to Income

SWARAJ FOUNDATION,VISAKHAPATANAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee trust in ITA

ITA 68/VIZ/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Jun 2025

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BALAKRISHNAN. S, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

10. Shri. GVN Hari, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short, “AR”) for the assessee trust at the threshold of hearing of the appeal, submitted that the CIT(Exemption) most arbitrarily based on a clerical mistake that has its genesis in an inadvertent error on the part of the assessee trust while filing the online application in “Form No. 10A” for provisional

SWARAJ FOUNDATION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee trust in ITA

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2

13
Section 143(1)10
Charitable Trust8
Depreciation7
ITA 69/VIZ/2025[NA]Status: Disposed
ITAT Visakhapatnam
30 Jun 2025

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI BALAKRISHNAN. S, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

10. Shri. GVN Hari, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short, “AR”) for the assessee trust at the threshold of hearing of the appeal, submitted that the CIT(Exemption) most arbitrarily based on a clerical mistake that has its genesis in an inadvertent error on the part of the assessee trust while filing the online application in “Form No. 10A” for provisional

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), EXEMPTION CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. ANDHRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 50/VIZ/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.50/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-2017) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Andhra Cricket (Exemptions) Association Exemptions Circle D.No.60-8-8, 5Th Lane Vijayawada Siddartha Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaatt2377D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.A.Rahim, I.T.P सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M.A.Rahim, I.T.P
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 194CSection 2(15)

22. Further it is noticed that the Hon’ble ITAT, Visakhapatnam once again held in the assessee’s own case for A.Ys 2013-14 to 2015-16 in ITA Nos. 279, 280 & 368/Viz/2018 vide order dated 18.01.2019 that the dominant object of the assessee is to develop the game of cricket and conducting of International matches on behalf of BCCI

SRI KANAKA MAHALAKSHMI AMMAVARI TEMPLE,BURUJUPETA vs. CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 358/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.358/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Sri Kanaka Mahalakshmi Ammavari Temple V. Centralized Processing Center D.No. 22-71-26/B, Skml Temple Bangalore. Kotha Road, Burujupeta Visakhapatnam – 530001, Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaajs1861M] (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/ Respondent)

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 154Section 65

charitable trusts/institutions. Admittedly, in the present case when the registration was granted on March 5, 2010, with effect from April 1, 2008, the assessment proceedings for 2007-08 were pending before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the assessee cannot be treated as an association of persons and is required to be treated as registered trust under section 12A of the Income

ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, TUNI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

ITA 465/VIZ/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Satyanandam, DR
Section 10Section 11Section 133ASection 2(24)

Trust vide its order in ITA No.927/09 dt.23.9.2009 has also affirmed the view taken by the Hon'ble ITAT in holding that corpus donations cannot be regarded as income under Section 2(24)(iia) of the Act. 5.3.5 Following the above decisions of the Tribunal (supra), relied upon by the assessee, we hold that voluntary contributions received for a specific

ACIT, (EXEMPTIONS), EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,, TUNI,

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

ITA 382/VIZ/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Satyanandam, DR
Section 10Section 11Section 133ASection 2(24)

Trust vide its order in ITA No.927/09 dt.23.9.2009 has also affirmed the view taken by the Hon'ble ITAT in holding that corpus donations cannot be regarded as income under Section 2(24)(iia) of the Act. 5.3.5 Following the above decisions of the Tribunal (supra), relied upon by the assessee, we hold that voluntary contributions received for a specific

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASHA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,, TUNII

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

ITA 467/VIZ/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Satyanandam, DR
Section 10Section 11Section 133ASection 2(24)

Trust vide its order in ITA No.927/09 dt.23.9.2009 has also affirmed the view taken by the Hon'ble ITAT in holding that corpus donations cannot be regarded as income under Section 2(24)(iia) of the Act. 5.3.5 Following the above decisions of the Tribunal (supra), relied upon by the assessee, we hold that voluntary contributions received for a specific

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS),, VIJAYAWADA vs. CARGO HANDLING PRIVATE WORKERS POOL TRUST,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 312/VIZ/2018[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Jun 2020AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Dr. C.P. Rama Swami, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.R.S. Narayan, CIT DR
Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)

22,56,000.00 07-07-2007 Interest amount received 12,51,121.86 26-11-2007 Interest amount received 10,98,248.00 29-01-2008 Interest amount received 20,000.00 24-03-2008 Interest amount received 35,082.00 26-11-2007 Principal amount received 10,00,000.00 29-01-2008 Principal amount received 10,00,000.00 24-03-2008 Principal amount

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS),, VIJAYAWADA vs. CARGO HANDLING PRIVATE WORKERS POOL TRUST,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 313/VIZ/2018[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Jun 2020AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Dr. C.P. Rama Swami, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.R.S. Narayan, CIT DR
Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)

22,56,000.00 07-07-2007 Interest amount received 12,51,121.86 26-11-2007 Interest amount received 10,98,248.00 29-01-2008 Interest amount received 20,000.00 24-03-2008 Interest amount received 35,082.00 26-11-2007 Principal amount received 10,00,000.00 29-01-2008 Principal amount received 10,00,000.00 24-03-2008 Principal amount

ARIHANT CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 324/VIZ/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.321-325/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16) M/S Arihant Constructions Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S B.V.Rao & Co Llp Circle-4(1) Chartered Accountants Visakhapatnam Ff-1, Satya Lakshmi Vinayaka Towers, Madhuranagar Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aarfa0600P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B.V.Rao, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.V.Subba Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23 .08.2019

For Appellant: Shri B.V.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.V.Subba Rao, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Charitable Trust had expired on 22-9-1992 was not noticed by the ITO. This is not a case of information on a question of law. The dispute as to whether reopening is permissible after the audit party expresses an opinion on a question of law is now being considered by a larger Bench of this Court. There

ARIHANT CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 323/VIZ/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.321-325/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16) M/S Arihant Constructions Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S B.V.Rao & Co Llp Circle-4(1) Chartered Accountants Visakhapatnam Ff-1, Satya Lakshmi Vinayaka Towers, Madhuranagar Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aarfa0600P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B.V.Rao, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.V.Subba Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23 .08.2019

For Appellant: Shri B.V.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.V.Subba Rao, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Charitable Trust had expired on 22-9-1992 was not noticed by the ITO. This is not a case of information on a question of law. The dispute as to whether reopening is permissible after the audit party expresses an opinion on a question of law is now being considered by a larger Bench of this Court. There

ARIHANT CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 321/VIZ/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.321-325/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16) M/S Arihant Constructions Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S B.V.Rao & Co Llp Circle-4(1) Chartered Accountants Visakhapatnam Ff-1, Satya Lakshmi Vinayaka Towers, Madhuranagar Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aarfa0600P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B.V.Rao, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.V.Subba Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23 .08.2019

For Appellant: Shri B.V.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.V.Subba Rao, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Charitable Trust had expired on 22-9-1992 was not noticed by the ITO. This is not a case of information on a question of law. The dispute as to whether reopening is permissible after the audit party expresses an opinion on a question of law is now being considered by a larger Bench of this Court. There

ARIHANT CONSTRUCTIONS, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 322/VIZ/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.321-325/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2011-12 To 2015-16) M/S Arihant Constructions Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S B.V.Rao & Co Llp Circle-4(1) Chartered Accountants Visakhapatnam Ff-1, Satya Lakshmi Vinayaka Towers, Madhuranagar Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aarfa0600P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri B.V.Rao, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.V.Subba Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23 .08.2019

For Appellant: Shri B.V.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.V.Subba Rao, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Charitable Trust had expired on 22-9-1992 was not noticed by the ITO. This is not a case of information on a question of law. The dispute as to whether reopening is permissible after the audit party expresses an opinion on a question of law is now being considered by a larger Bench of this Court. There

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), RAJAHMUNDRY vs. AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTE,, AKIVEEDU

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 316/VIZ/2018[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2019AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleito (Exemptions), Vs. M/S. Agricultural Market Rajahmundry. Committee, Siddhantham Road, Market Yard, Akiveedu, W.G. District. Pan No. Aakfa 8420 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Appalra Raju– Sr.DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)

section 11 & 12 of the Act. C.O.No. 129/VIZ/2018 (M/s. Agricultural Market Committee) 5. On being aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) by following the decision in assessee’s own case for the earlier year, deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. For the sake of convenience, the relevant portion

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS),, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTE, , PENUGONDA

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue as well as cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 315/VIZ/2018[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Mar 2019AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleito (Exemptions), Vs. M/S. Agricultural Market Rajahmundry. Committee, Sidhantam Road Market Yard, Penugonda, West Godavari District Pan No. Aaala 0388 F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

22,921/- and the amount applied for the assessee’s charitable activities was Rs.1,43,74,285/-. More than 85% of the income of the year was applied for charitable purposes and hence there was no accumulation of income and notice in Form No. 10 was not necessary. The assessment was completed denying exemption u/s. 11, rejecting Form no. 10

VISAKHAPATNAM METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (VMRDA),VISAKHAPATNAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), 2ND FLOOR, AYAKAR BHAWAN, BASHEER BEGH, , HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 52/VIZ/2020[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jan 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.52/Viz/2020

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Sonowal, CIT(DR)For Respondent: 26.11.2020
Section 12ASection 2(15)

22 of the Act provides for procedure for managing the funds of the assessee. 5.3. Section 34 gives authority to Government to give directions from time to time for efficient administration of the Act. 5.4. In the instant case, the Ld.CCIT viewed that the assessee has lost sight of the objects from the assessment year 2008 onwards and carrying

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR(AH) VETERINARY HOSPITAL,,JAGGAMPETA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, WARD-1,, RAJAHMUNDRY

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

ITA 519/VIZ/2018[2015-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam01 Feb 2018AY 2015-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blethe Asst. Director (Ah) Vs. Ito (Tds), Ward-1, Veterinary Hospital, D.No. 7-63, Rajahmundry. Gokavaram Road, Jaggampeta, East Godavari District. Pan No. Vpnao 1812 G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam– FCAFor Respondent: Shri D.V. Subba Rao – Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

10. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has considered the same issue in the case of Sree Ayyappa Educational Charitable Trust vs. DCIT [(2018) 301 CTR 150 (Kar.)] by considering the judgment of the same High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors. (supra) and held that “when the amendment made under section 200A of the Act, which

MANORAMA ENTERPRISES,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, WARD-1, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 385/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.385/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2013-14) M/S Manorama Enterprises Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.31-32-41 Tds, Ward-1 Near Leelamahal Theatre Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aadfm5585H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R.L.N.Somayajulu, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.V.Subba Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.07.2019 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R.L.N.Somayajulu, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.V.Subba Rao, DR
Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 201Section 234E

Charitable Trust vs. DCIT [(2018) 301 CTR 150 (Kar.)] by considering the judgment of the same High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors. (supra) and held that “when the amendment made under section 200A of the Act, which has come into effect on 01/06/2015 is held to be having prospective effect, no computation of fee for the demand

PAVANI DEVI,,GUNTUR vs. THE CIT(A)-2,, GUNTUR

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

ITA 312/VIZ/2016[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam01 Feb 2018AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blesmt. Pavani Devi, Vs. Acit, Cpc (Tds), M/S. N. Koteswara & Co., Cas, Ghaziabad. D.No. 23-6-17/2, Patnam Bazar, Guntur. Pan No. Afmpd 2253 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.V.N. Hari – Advocate. Department By : Mrs. Suman Malik – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/12/2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 01/01/2019. O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

Charitable Trust vs. (Smt. Pavani Devi) DCIT [(2018) 301 CTR 150 (Kar.)] by considering the judgment of the same High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors. (supra) and held that “when the amendment made under section 200A of the Act, which has come into effect on 01/06/2015 is held to be having prospective effect, no computation

AVNC HIGH SCHOOL, ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL PROCESSING CELL, TDS,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 459/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam01 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

Charitable Trust vs. DCIT [(2018) 301 CTR 150 (Kar.)] by considering the judgment of the same High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors. (supra) and held that “when the amendment made under section 200A of the Act, which has come into effect on 01/06/2015 is held to be having prospective effect, no computation of fee for the demand