ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. ALL INDIA FINE ARTS & CRAFTS SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2012-13 Ito(E), Vs All India Fine Arts & Crafts Society, Trust Ward-1(1), 1, Rafi Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabaa3719N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajan Malik, Advocate & Shri Gulshan Gaba, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 4Th July, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-40 (Exemption), New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2012- 13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Read As Under:- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee By Not Appreciating The Fact That The Activity Of The Assessee Of Letting Out Gallery Frequently For A Price Does Not Qualify As Being Called In The Nature Of Charity. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Allowing Accumulation Of Income U/S 11(2) Of The Income Tax Act, Amounting To Rs.1,53,50,000/- Which The Assessee Has Failed To Utilize Within Prescribed Time As Per Law. 3. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, To Alter Or Amend Any Ground Of Appeal Raised Above At The Time Of Hearing.”

TDS as a pure rent. Further, the rent from the property has never been considered 5 or linked with the main activities of the assessee, i.e., promotion of fine arts and crafts under the first proviso to section 2(15

SOCIETY FOR PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH IN ASIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

ITO (E), DELHI vs. ALL INDIAN FINE ARTS & CRAFTS SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhu & Sh. R. K. Pandaita No. 1806/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer(E), Vs All India Fine Arts & Crafts Trust Ward-1(1), Society, 1, Rafi Marg, Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaata7840E Assessee By : Sh. Rajan Malik, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Surendra Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing :29.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2019 Order Per R. K. Panda:

TDS is a pure rent. Further, the rent from the property has never been considered or linked with the main activities of the assessee i.e. promotion of Fine Arts & Crafts under the first proviso to Section 2(15

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX vs. S.S. AHLUWALIA

15% of the tax liability. Dispute arose whether the application under Section 220(6) should have been decided by Additional Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner. Reference was made to the term ―Assessing Officer‖ as defined in Section 2(7A) of the Act and it was observed that under Section 220(6) discretionary power vested with the Assessing Officer and since Additional

COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-XVI vs. S.S. AHLUWALIA

15% of the tax liability. Dispute arose whether the application under Section 220(6) should have been decided by Additional Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner. Reference was made to the term ―Assessing Officer‖ as defined in Section 2(7A) of the Act and it was observed that under Section 220(6) discretionary power vested with the Assessing Officer and since Additional

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

15 and 16 and of this section (1) : (2) perquisite includes (i) to (iv)** (v) any sum payable by the employer, whether directly or through a fund, other than a recognized provident fund or an approved superannuation fund or a Deposit-linked Insurance Fund established under section 3G of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

15 and 16 and of this section (1) : (2) perquisite includes (i) to (iv)** (v) any sum payable by the employer, whether directly or through a fund, other than a recognized provident fund or an approved superannuation fund or a Deposit-linked Insurance Fund established under section 3G of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions

YOSHIO KUBO vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

15 and 16 and of this section (1) : (2) perquisite includes (i) to (iv)** (v) any sum payable by the employer, whether directly or through a fund, other than a recognized provident fund or an approved superannuation fund or a Deposit-linked Insurance Fund established under section 3G of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions

DCIT (EXEMPTION), GHAZIABAD vs. M/S. DIVYA YOG MANDIR TRUST, HARIDWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit(Exemptions), Divya Yog Mandir Trust, Room No. 105, 1St Floor, Kripalu Bagh, Cgo-Ii, Vs Kankhal, Kamla Nehru Nagar, Haridwar. Ghaziabad. (Pan: Aaatd1114E) Appellant Respondent Department By: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, C.I.T. Dr Assessee By: Shri Rohti Jain, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2019 O R D E R

section 2(15) and was, therefore, entitled to the benefit of exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act. The Assessing Officer was accordingly directed to extend the exemption u/s 11 and 12 to the assessee as per the observations of the ITAT in assessee’s own case as aforementioned. 2.3 Aggrieved with this finding of the Ld. Commissioner

HERO FINCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 11(1), DELHI, C.R. BUILDING

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

15 crores. Similar\nprovision created during last year was of Rs. 5.25 crores is reversed and therefore\nnet Expenses claimed based such provision comes to Rs. 9.75 crores.\n4\nITA No. 2542/Del/2024\nFurther, the assessee has duly deducted tax on such provision. Party wise details\nof provision booked, TDS deducted on such provision along with TDS certificates\nissued

INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

TDS Payable 4.363.060 4.363.060 Other Current Liabilities 583.059 583.059 Provision for Interest on Loan 39.267.539 39.267.539 Liabilities (B) 44,483,658 44,483,658 C=(A+B) 1,243,424,451 2,984,397,259 Unsecured Loan (Thomson Press India Limited) 819.187,525 819,187,525 Total Firm Value 4.24.236.926 2.165.749.734 Net Finn Value 424,236,926 2

INDIA TODAY ONLINE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuita Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018 Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15

TDS Payable 4.363.060 4.363.060 Other Current Liabilities 583.059 583.059 Provision for Interest on Loan 39.267.539 39.267.539 Liabilities (B) 44,483,658 44,483,658 C=(A+B) 1,243,424,451 2,984,397,259 Unsecured Loan (Thomson Press India Limited) 819.187,525 819,187,525 Total Firm Value 4.24.236.926 2.165.749.734 Net Finn Value 424,236,926 2

DCIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI vs. NEW DELHI YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION (YMCA), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2012-13] The D.C.I.T[E] Vs. New Delhi Young Men’S Circle – 2(1) Christian Association Ltd New Delhi 1, Jai Singh Road, Connaught Place New Delhi Pan : Aaatn 1200 H Co No. 83/Del/2016 (A/O Ita No. 4983/Del/2015 [Assessment Year: 2012-13]) New Delhi Young Men’S Vs. The D.C.I.T[E] Christian Association Ltd Circle – 2(1) 1, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi Connaught Place New Delhi Pan : Aaatn 1200 H [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Adv Shri V. Rajakumar, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. Dr

15) of the Act, as the assessee is providing hostel services by letting out A/C rooms and by providing other facilities and luxuries to the visitors. Thus, the benefit of section 11 & 12 are not allowable to the assessee; 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the cases and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

CIT vs. CJ INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD

The appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

2. The assessees are engaged in the business of owning, operating and managing hotels. Surveys were conducted under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) at the business premises of the assessees during which it was found that the assessees had been paying tips to its employees but not deducting taxes thereon

CIT vs. CJ INTERNATIONAL HOTELS LTD

The appeals are allowed

2. The assessees are engaged in the business of owning, operating and managing hotels. Surveys were conducted under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) at the business premises of the assessees during which it was found that the assessees had been paying tips to its employees but not deducting taxes thereon

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI vs. ODIA SAMAJ, NEW DELHI

In the result Cross objections raised by assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

TDS was deducted under section 194J/C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (‘the Act’) 2. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in law the AO/CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the case of the Assessee is not hit by the second proviso to section 2(15

VACHASPATI SHARMA,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD -4(1), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Vachaspati Sharma Vs Ito Village – Hayatpur Garhi Ward-4 Harsaru, Hayatpur, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan No.Fnqps2021R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellants By Sh. Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate Sh. K.L. Pahwa, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 11/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 Order Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

section 194A of the I.T. Act. 11. Reliance has also placed on the following judgments :- 1. CIT, Faridabad vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) [29] 182 Taxman 368 (SC) 2. CIT, Rajkot Vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya [2014] 52 taxman.com 27 (SC) 3. Surjit Kumar Chetal Vs. CIT-XV [2017] 86 taxmann.com 121 (Delhi) 4. Movaliya Bhikhubhai Balabhai v. ITO [2016] 70 taxmann.com

VIJAY SINGH CHAUHAN,NOIDA vs. ITO,WARD-2(5), NOIDA

The appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Pareek & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishravijay Singh Chauhan, Income Tax Officer, House No.-193, Gali No.-3, Vs. Ward- 2(5), Noida, Village Chhalera, Sector-44, Uttar Pradesh, Noida, Uttar Pradesh India. India. Pan No: Aeipc4637E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Sh. Naveen Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.09.2025 Order Per Sudhir Pareek, Jm: The Aforetitled Appeal Has Been Preferred Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter, In Short, ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 17.07.2023 For Ay 2015-16, By Which Appeal Of The Assessee Was Dismissed.

TDS) @ 10 per cent only on amount of Rs.13,43,02,195/- which is the interest portion and the remaining amount of Rs.3,85,10,725 being enhanced value and solatium not been considered for deduction of tax at source. Hence it is clear that the authority has not considered the entire amount as enhanced value of compensation attributable