JT. CIT (OSD), (E), C-2, CHANDIGARH vs. CH. LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 717/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

deduction of TDS and the above balance was outstanding as on 31.03.2012. Hence to classify the same under unverified is again not fair and addition made on this account is also wrong and illegal. The same is verifiable from the copy of account of the aforesaid assessee. 13 ITA No.717-Chd/2019 Shri Lekh Raj Educational & Charitable Trust

M/S PSTCL CSR TRUST,PATIALA vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

deductible as expenditure is now being claimed exempt. 10. On perusal of the income and expenditure account for the F.Y. 2015-16 and F.Y. 2016-17, it is observed that applicant trust has shown zero income and zero expenditure during the said years which means that the applicant trust has not undertaken any activity during this period. The absence

THE VED PRAKASH MUKAND LAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,YAMUNANAGAR vs. DCIT, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.824/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.825/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Dcit Educational Society Circle Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Haryana C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.833/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.832/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Circle Yamuna Nagar Educational Society बनाम/ Haryana (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Vs. C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual)

charitable purposes. In order to cover the deficit, a sum of Rs.1,25,82,774/- is claimed to have been have been deposited in the bank fixed deposit Receipts in pursuance of Section 11(2) and 11(5) of the Income Tax Act. However, for the purposes that income of the trust so accumulated or set apart shall

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, YAMUNANAGAR vs. M/S THE VED PARKASH MUKAND LAL, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.824/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.825/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Dcit Educational Society Circle Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Haryana C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.833/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.832/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Circle Yamuna Nagar Educational Society बनाम/ Haryana (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Vs. C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual)

charitable purposes. In order to cover the deficit, a sum of Rs.1,25,82,774/- is claimed to have been have been deposited in the bank fixed deposit Receipts in pursuance of Section 11(2) and 11(5) of the Income Tax Act. However, for the purposes that income of the trust so accumulated or set apart shall

DCIT vs. M/S THE VED PARKASH MUKAND LAL, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.824/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.825/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Dcit Educational Society Circle Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Haryana C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.833/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.832/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Circle Yamuna Nagar Educational Society बनाम/ Haryana (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Vs. C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual)

charitable purposes. In order to cover the deficit, a sum of Rs.1,25,82,774/- is claimed to have been have been deposited in the bank fixed deposit Receipts in pursuance of Section 11(2) and 11(5) of the Income Tax Act. However, for the purposes that income of the trust so accumulated or set apart shall

THE VED PRAKASH MUKAND LAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,YAMUNANAGAR vs. DCIT, YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeals, for both the years, stand dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.824/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.825/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Dcit Educational Society Circle Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Haryana C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.833/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.832/Chandi/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dcit The Ved Prakash Mukand Lal Circle Yamuna Nagar Educational Society बनाम/ Haryana (Radaur, Yamuna Nagar) Vs. C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) #527, Sector – 10D, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatv-4812-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Yamini (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual)

charitable purposes. In order to cover the deficit, a sum of Rs.1,25,82,774/- is claimed to have been have been deposited in the bank fixed deposit Receipts in pursuance of Section 11(2) and 11(5) of the Income Tax Act. However, for the purposes that income of the trust so accumulated or set apart shall

HIMALAYAN BUDDHIST CULTURAL ASSOCIATION,KULLU vs. ACIT,CIRCLE/DCIT CPC,BENGLURU, MANDI

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

Bench: Due Date Of Filling Of Income Tax Return Was On Bonafide Grounds, The Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Condoning The Delay.

Trust for charitable purposes and the same being duly deposited as per provisions of section 11(5) of the Act, the addition made is against the scope of section 11 and is un-sustainable under law. 3. That the orders of the lower authorities are not justified on facts and the same are bad in law. 4. That the assessee

DCIT, C-,1 (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB MEDICAL FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri N.K. Saini, Vice- & Rajpal Yadav, Vice-"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Cir.1(Exemption) M/S.Punjab Medical Foundation Chandigarh. Vs. Charitable Trust 63-64, Waryam Nagar Cool Road, Jalandhar Pan : Aaatp 5171 B (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Sudhir Sehal, Advocate Assessee By Revenue By : Shri Ashok K. Khana, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18/11/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/12/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

charitable trust in the course of their activities has been considered in detail by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CT Educational Trust. It is found that profit rate declared by the appellant has been accepted in the past as well and considering the fact that it is 1.5% for the year under consideration

CT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,JALANDHAR vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is Partly Allowed for\nStatistical Purposes as per the directions above

charitable purpose as defined in Section 2(15) of the\nIncome Tax Act.The assessee society is affiliated with Central Board of Secondary\nEducation (CBSE), Punjab Technical University (PTU), All India Council of Technical\nEducation (AICTE), Council of Architecture. All of these are Governmental Bodies\npromoting and imparting education, and assessee society is affiliated and\nassociated with them. All these facts

DCIT, C-1 (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH vs. THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

trust or institution and the amount so paid is in excess of what may be\nreasonably paid for such services;\n9.3 A perusal of Section 13(1)(c) would indicate that if any\nbenefit has been provided directly or indirectly to the\npersons mentioned under Section 13(3), then such benefit\nwould be excluded from the alleged total income computed

THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS SOCIETY,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, C-1, CHANDIGARH

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

charitable purposes of the trust. The assessee cannot be allowed deduction on account of application of funds on capital expenditure

M/S INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, (EXEMPTIONS), C-2, CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2014-15 Infrastructure Development Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax बनाम Fund (Exemptions) Circle-2, Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 528 /Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Infrastructure Development Acit, बनाम Fund Circle-2 (Exemptions), Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri A. K. Jindal, Ca, Smt. Ratan Kaur & Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Chandrajeet Singh, Cit(Dr) Smt. C. Chandrakanta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2020 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2020

deducting therefrom the expenses as per the Income & Expenditure account of the assessee. The AO did not allow the assessee the benefit of expenditure ITA No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018-& 528/2017 Infrastructure Development Fund, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Chandigarh 4 incurred on capital account in various projects ,holding that they were capital in nature and since the assessee was not eligible for exemption

M/S INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2014-15 Infrastructure Development Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax बनाम Fund (Exemptions) Circle-2, Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 528 /Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Infrastructure Development Acit, बनाम Fund Circle-2 (Exemptions), Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri A. K. Jindal, Ca, Smt. Ratan Kaur & Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Chandrajeet Singh, Cit(Dr) Smt. C. Chandrakanta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2020 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2020

deducting therefrom the expenses as per the Income & Expenditure account of the assessee. The AO did not allow the assessee the benefit of expenditure ITA No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018-& 528/2017 Infrastructure Development Fund, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Chandigarh 4 incurred on capital account in various projects ,holding that they were capital in nature and since the assessee was not eligible for exemption

M/S INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, (EXEMPTIONS), C-2, CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2014-15 Infrastructure Development Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax बनाम Fund (Exemptions) Circle-2, Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 528 /Chd/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Infrastructure Development Acit, बनाम Fund Circle-2 (Exemptions), Sco-71-17 Sector-17C Chandigarh Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aaal10136K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri A. K. Jindal, Ca, Smt. Ratan Kaur & Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Chandrajeet Singh, Cit(Dr) Smt. C. Chandrakanta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2020 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2020

deducting therefrom the expenses as per the Income & Expenditure account of the assessee. The AO did not allow the assessee the benefit of expenditure ITA No. 644 & 645/Chd/2018-& 528/2017 Infrastructure Development Fund, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Chandigarh 4 incurred on capital account in various projects ,holding that they were capital in nature and since the assessee was not eligible for exemption

JCIT(OSD), C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

deducted at source from the payments made to them. Copies of the TDS returns filed for different quarters are enclosed. Almost all the artisans are regular income-tax assessees and their PAN's have been mentioned on the returns filed before the respective wing of the Department. (viii) It is admitted that the expenditure to the tune of Rs.6

THE SIKH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,PATIALA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, PATIALA

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against Assessment Order Dt. 30/03/2013 Which Was Passed By Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala Range, Patiala, Punjab Which Order Is Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao’S Order”.

deducted at source from the payments made to them. Copies of the TDS returns filed for different quarters are enclosed. Almost all the artisans are regular income-tax assessees and their PAN's have been mentioned on the returns filed before the respective wing of the Department. (viii) It is admitted that the expenditure to the tune of Rs.6

M/S VARDHMAN POLYTEX LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

deduction was claimed under section 35(1)(ii) @ 125% on the donation of sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- paid to Indian Medical Scientific & Research Foundation. ('IMSRF' 'In short' herein after) a duly registered public charitable trust

DCIT, C-1, (E), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S MANAV MANGAL SOCIETY, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and all the appeals of the department are dismissed

Charitable or Religious trust-Denial of exemption (sub-section (1)(c)-Assessment year 2010-11- Assessee Trust was running a school-t paid rent to HUF whose Karta was trust of assessee trust-Assessing Officer taking a view that such payment breached section 13(1)(c), denied exemption claimed by the assessee under section 11- Commissioner (Appeals) as well