LEADER PEOPLE SERVICE CHARITABLE TRUST,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.471/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: Na) Leader People Service Vs. The Income Tax Officer Charitable Trust, (Exemption Ward), Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aabtl4868N (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 29/10/2025 Pronouncement: O R D E R "ित रवीश सूद, जे.एम./Per Ravish Sood, J.M. The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Trust Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(Exemptions)”], Hyderabad, Dated 17.06.2025 Rejecting Its Application Filed In “Form No. 10Ab” For Regular Registration Under Section 80G(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”). The Assessee

25. 3. Therefore, the assessee trust filed an application for regular registration under Section 80G of the Act in “Form No. 10AB” on 15.10.2024. During the course of proceedings, the assessee trust in response to notices issued by the CIT(Exemptions), dated 26.03.2025 and 19.05.2025, vide its 3 Leader People Service Charitable

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

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

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

charitable institutions. 16. In our considered view, the CIT(Exemptions) ought not to have rejected the application filed by the assessee trust in “Form No. 10AB” for permanent registration u/s 12AB as non-maintainable without affording it an opportunity to rectify the said procedural error. We are of firm conviction that the rendering of substantive justice should not be allowed

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

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

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

charitable institutions. 16. In our considered view, the CIT(Exemptions) ought not to have rejected the application filed by the assessee trust in “Form No. 10AB” for permanent registration u/s 12AB as non-maintainable without affording it an opportunity to rectify the said procedural error. We are of firm conviction that the rendering of substantive justice should not be allowed

SREERAM BHAGAWATHI AYYAPPA SEVA TRUST,KAKINADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KAKINADA

In the result, the impugned order dated 13

Bench: rejection.”

charitable and religious nature. 4. The rejection order is mechanical and arbitrary, as it does not specify how the trust’s activities deviate from its stated objectives. 5. The Ld. CIT(E) failed to apply the principle of natural justice by not providing an opportunity for further clarification before rejection.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee trust was constituted

SREERAM BHAGAWATHI AYYAPPA SEVA TRUST,KAKINADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KAKINADA

In the result, the impugned order dated 13

Bench: rejection.”

charitable and religious nature. 4. The rejection order is mechanical and arbitrary, as it does not specify how the trust’s activities deviate from its stated objectives. 5. The Ld. CIT(E) failed to apply the principle of natural justice by not providing an opportunity for further clarification before rejection.” 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee trust was constituted

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

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

charitable purpose as held by the Hon‟ble AP High Court in the case of CIT AP-1 Vs. Trustee of V.H.E.H. the Nizams Supplemental Trust [127 ITR 378]. The CIT(A) after considering the relevant submissions rightly allowed the claim of the assessee. We do not see any error or infirmity in the order passed

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

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

charitable purpose as held by the Hon‟ble AP High Court in the case of CIT AP-1 Vs. Trustee of V.H.E.H. the Nizams Supplemental Trust [127 ITR 378]. The CIT(A) after considering the relevant submissions rightly allowed the claim of the assessee. We do not see any error or infirmity in the order passed

DR KONDABOLU BASAVAPUNAIAH & DR LAKSHMI PRASAD TRUST,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), GUNTUR

Charitable\nTrust registered under section 12A of the Act and Section 80G of the Act.\nFor the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on\n31.03.2018 declaring a total income of Rs.2,13,63,753/-. The return filed by the\nassessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS in order to verify the sale of\nshares, securities

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

25,02,854 Income from India – Srilanka T20 match 2,50,08,563 Annual subscriptions received 10,000 Interest on IT refund 17,09,125 Rent received from stadium complex 20,07,770 Income from IPL matches 27,36,287 Total 45,13,91,540 10. It was further observed that the BCCI reimbursements & grants of Rs.37

ASSOCIATION OF RELIEF VOLUNTREERS,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS), RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.194/Viz/2020 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2016-17) Association Of Relief Volunteers, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Vijayawada. (Exemptions), Pan: Aacta 0213 B Rajahmundry. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar

25,733/- was also actually expended. 6 4. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing.” 5. The Ld. AR submitted that a detailed reply including copies of the invoices which have been received during the assessment year 2017-18 for the advances paid during the AY 2016-17 has been placed before the Bench

SRI VISWESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE,MACHILIPATNAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

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

25 days\nPage. No 2\nI.T.A.No.544/VIZ/2025\nSri Visweswara Swamy Temple\nin filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on\nmerits in the following paragraphs.\n4. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee has filed an\ne-application on 23.10.2024 in Form No.10AB seeking registration under section\n12AB

SRIPADA SRIVALLABHA MAHA SAMSTANAM,PITHAPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION WARD), RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Balakrishnan, S & आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.289/Viz/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sripada Srivallabha Vs. Income Tax Officer Mahasamsthanam Exemption Ward Pithapuram Rajahmundry Pan:Aadts8424P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Vvs Narayana Medisetti राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/11/2024 आदेश/Order

Charitable Trust and taken over by the Endowment Department, in the year 2017. Thus, the affairs of the assessee trust are being managed and controlled by the Executive Officer of the A.P Endowment Department. The limitation for filing the appeal was to expire on 20th October, 2023. However, in the month of October, 2023, the temple was celebrating Sripada Swamy

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

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

25% of the total receipts of the said period and the activity of the assessee is of not charitable activity. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before the Tribunal. 4. The ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) rejected the fresh application filed by the assessee on the ground that the registration

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, CO raised by the assessee is disposed off as discussed herein above

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.25/Viz/2014 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2010-11) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. Addl. Cit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Range-1, Visakhapatnam Port Trust) Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv0035C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

Charitable Trust / institution. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam observed that allowing the deduction of expenditure relating to the earlier assessment years during the AY 2010-11 amounted to grant of double benefit to the assessee and therefore the order of 10 the Ld. AO is erroneous and also prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, CO raised by the assessee is disposed off as discussed herein above

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.25/Viz/2014 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2010-11) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. Addl. Cit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Range-1, Visakhapatnam Port Trust) Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv0035C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

Charitable Trust / institution. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam observed that allowing the deduction of expenditure relating to the earlier assessment years during the AY 2010-11 amounted to grant of double benefit to the assessee and therefore the order of 10 the Ld. AO is erroneous and also prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, CO raised by the assessee is disposed off as discussed herein above

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.25/Viz/2014 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2010-11) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. Addl. Cit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Range-1, Visakhapatnam Port Trust) Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv0035C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

Charitable Trust / institution. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam observed that allowing the deduction of expenditure relating to the earlier assessment years during the AY 2010-11 amounted to grant of double benefit to the assessee and therefore the order of 10 the Ld. AO is erroneous and also prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY, , VISAKHAPTNAM

In the result, CO raised by the assessee is disposed off as discussed herein above

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.25/Viz/2014 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2010-11) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. Addl. Cit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Range-1, Visakhapatnam Port Trust) Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv0035C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

Charitable Trust / institution. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam observed that allowing the deduction of expenditure relating to the earlier assessment years during the AY 2010-11 amounted to grant of double benefit to the assessee and therefore the order of 10 the Ld. AO is erroneous and also prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT AUTHORITY,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, CO raised by the assessee is disposed off as discussed herein above

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.25/Viz/2014 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2010-11) Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Vs. Addl. Cit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Range-1, Visakhapatnam Port Trust) Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaalv0035C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent)

Charitable Trust / institution. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam observed that allowing the deduction of expenditure relating to the earlier assessment years during the AY 2010-11 amounted to grant of double benefit to the assessee and therefore the order of 10 the Ld. AO is erroneous and also prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Ld. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam