SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Charitable Trust – Exemption under section 11 – Constitution and bye laws of assessee, a religious institution, indicated that its property was intended for the common purpose of furthering the objects of the State Satguru and the Central Council had the authority to manage the property – Properties vested in the trust and also recorded in the name of Sabha (Central Council) – Satguru

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Charitable Trust – Exemption under section 11 – Constitution and bye laws of assessee, a religious institution, indicated that its property was intended for the common purpose of furthering the objects of the State Satguru and the Central Council had the authority to manage the property – Properties vested in the trust and also recorded in the name of Sabha (Central Council) – Satguru

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Charitable Trust – Exemption under section 11 – Constitution and bye laws of assessee, a religious institution, indicated that its property was intended for the common purpose of furthering the objects of the State Satguru and the Central Council had the authority to manage the property – Properties vested in the trust and also recorded in the name of Sabha (Central Council) – Satguru

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Charitable Trust – Exemption under section 11 – Constitution and bye laws of assessee, a religious institution, indicated that its property was intended for the common purpose of furthering the objects of the State Satguru and the Central Council had the authority to manage the property – Properties vested in the trust and also recorded in the name of Sabha (Central Council) – Satguru

SURYA MERCHANTS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, KANPUR

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Charitable Trust – Exemption under section 11 – Constitution and bye laws of assessee, a religious institution, indicated that its property was intended for the common purpose of furthering the objects of the State Satguru and the Central Council had the authority to manage the property – Properties vested in the trust and also recorded in the name of Sabha (Central Council) – Satguru

DHEERWATI SEWA TRUST ,MEERUT vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royasstt. Yr: 2017-18

u/s 263 referring it to the Assessing Officer in Arbitrary manner. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the order of CIT (Exemptions) is erroneous, arbitrary and bad in law and on facts. The order is an abuse to competence to exercise the revision powers

PETROLEUM FEDERATION OF INDIA,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

revision u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. That the Ld. CIT (Exemption) failed to appreciate that the assessment order so passed by the Assessing Officer was completed after due process of law and only after taking into consideration, exemption and verification of detailed information provided and all the supporting evidences produced, filed and placed upon records

PETROLEUM FEDERATION OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. CIT (E), NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

revision u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. That the Ld. CIT (Exemption) failed to appreciate that the assessment order so passed by the Assessing Officer was completed after due process of law and only after taking into consideration, exemption and verification of detailed information provided and all the supporting evidences produced, filed and placed upon records

SARASWATI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY REGD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT EXEMPTION , DELHI

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

charitable purposes and consequently in setting aside the whole asstt. denovo to A.O. 5.1 That under the facts and circumstances, in view of the fact that the assessee was not allowed exemption U/s.11 & 12 by the A.O., the issue of interest of Rs.43,62,640/- whether to be allowed or not in relevant asstt. order did not survive for further

NIIT FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyniit Foundation, Vs. Cit(E), Plot No. 8, Balaji Estate, New Delhi Sudarshan Munjal Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi Pan: Aacan3951E (Appellant) (Respondent)

revision of the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act by ITO(E), Ward 2(4), New Delhi ("the AO") on the alleged ground that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 4.2 The Appellant prays that order passed u/s. 263 of the Act be struck down as null and void

INDIAN INTERNATIONAL CENTRE,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11 India International Centre, Vs. Cit (E), 40, Max Muller Marg, Room No.2620, Lodhi Estate, Civic Centre, New Delhi. Jl Nehru Marg, New Delhi. Pan: Aaati0660C

trust, registered u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The same rejected on following accounts:- Exemptions u/s 11,12 and 13 are allowable subject to fulfillment of (i) conditions laid down under the respective section. As already observed the assessee has shown the compliance to conditions only with respect to income amounting to Rs. 807.19 lacs. Further, as already

M/S. KRISHAK BHARATI COOPERATIVE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

u/s 263 of the I.T. Act. 10. In support of aforesaid contentions, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has filed detailed written submissions, relevant documents and judicial pronouncements, For the sake of clarity, the relevant part of the written submissions of the Ld. Counsel of the Assessee is reproduced below:- "9. At the very outset, the Assessee

M/S. KRISHAK BHARATI COOPERATIVE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

u/s 263 of the I.T. Act. 10. In support of aforesaid contentions, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has filed detailed written submissions, relevant documents and judicial pronouncements, For the sake of clarity, the relevant part of the written submissions of the Ld. Counsel of the Assessee is reproduced below:- "9. At the very outset, the Assessee

M/S P.D. MEMORIAL RELIGIOUS & EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION,HARYANA vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

In the result this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Suchitra Kamblea.Y. : …..

charitable Trust to an AOP. 6. The above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.” 9.1. The assessment order passed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on31.12.2010 was revised by the Ld.CIT u/s 263

ACIT, FARIDABAD vs. M/S. P.D. MEMORIAL RELIGIOUS & EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS, BAHADURGARH

In the result this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Suchitra Kamblea.Y. : …..

charitable Trust to an AOP. 6. The above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.” 9.1. The assessment order passed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on31.12.2010 was revised by the Ld.CIT u/s 263

GANDHI COLLEGE OF PHARMACY,KARNAL vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. C. M. Garg, Jm Ita No. 3476/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Gandhi College Of Pharmacy, Vs Acit, Near Iti Chowk, G. T. Road, Circle, Karnal Karnal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg5629D Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Ashish Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.03.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A), Karnal. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Is Bad Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts. 2(I) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Action Of A.O. In Holding That The Assesses Is Not Eligible For Exemption Under Section 10(23C)(Iiiad) Of The Act.

charitable purposes. Accordingly, the AO did not accept the contention of the assessee and rejected the reply by observing as under: “7(ii) As regards para (b) of reply, the provisions of section 10(23C)(iiiad) prohibits exemption to educational institution existing solely for the purpose of profit. In the case of the assessee, out of gross receipt of Rs.8111290

CENTRE FOR GENERAL EDUCATION SOCIETY ,GHAZIABAD vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Smt. Renu Jauhricentre For General Vs. Cit Exemption Education Society, Lucknow A-16, Site-3, Merrut Road Upside Indl. Area, Ghaziabad (Pan: Aaatc8262G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Govind Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Jitender Singh, Cit(Dr)

revision order passed by the CIT Exemption, Lucknow u/s. 263 of the Act by holding that assessment order is passed without making proper enquiries and directed to examine the objections of the donee trusts. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an educational trust and during the year under consideration the trust has earned income from

SETH MADAN LAL PALRIWALA FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

263 shows that the same was inserted by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 which is not applicable to the present case pertaining to AY 2014-15 being deeming provisions 11. Ld. AR for the assessee further contended that there is no lack of enquiry nor even inadequate enquiry conducted by the AO at the time of framing assessment u/s