COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JAMNALAL BAJAJ FOUNDATION

25% or Rs 10,000 whichever is higher, is taxable under Section 11(1)(a) of the Act, unless the special conditions regarding accumulation as laid down in Section 11(2) are complied with. It is clear, therefore, that if the entire income received by a trust is spent for charitable

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JAMNALAL BAJAJ FOUNDATION

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

25% or Rs 10,000 whichever is higher, is taxable under Section 11(1)(a) of the Act, unless the special conditions regarding accumulation as laid down in Section 11(2) are complied with. It is clear, therefore, that if the entire income received by a trust is spent for charitable

SARASWATHI AMMAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRE CIRCLE II, NOIDA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

10 also.” 38. Thus, applying the above ratio, the act of collecting the capitation fee if done by the said Sh. V. Mathiyalgan cannot be considered to be within the scope of his employment and in such an Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

10 also.” 38. Thus, applying the above ratio, the act of collecting the capitation fee if done by the said Sh. V. Mathiyalgan cannot be considered to be within the scope of his employment and in such an Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, , CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

10 also.” 38. Thus, applying the above ratio, the act of collecting the capitation fee if done by the said Sh. V. Mathiyalgan cannot be considered to be within the scope of his employment and in such an Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

10 also.” 38. Thus, applying the above ratio, the act of collecting the capitation fee if done by the said Sh. V. Mathiyalgan cannot be considered to be within the scope of his employment and in such an Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

10 also.” 38. Thus, applying the above ratio, the act of collecting the capitation fee if done by the said Sh. V. Mathiyalgan cannot be considered to be within the scope of his employment and in such an Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

10 also.” 38. Thus, applying the above ratio, the act of collecting the capitation fee if done by the said Sh. V. Mathiyalgan cannot be considered to be within the scope of his employment and in such an Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT event, the Assessee trust cannot be held liable for the said

RICHMOND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

10. The Learned PCIT had invoked Clause (a) of Explanation to Section 12AB(4) of the Act by stating that the Assessee had committed specified violation thereon. The provisions of Section 12AB(4) of the Act together with its Explanation are already reproduced hereinabove. On a plain and harmonious reading of Clause (a) of Explanation to Section 12AB

JCIT(OSD)(E) CIRCLE-2(1), NEW DELHI vs. POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

25. In the aforesaid scenario, the approval under section 10(23C) of the Act cannot be revoked, more so, when the objects of the assessee have remained same. We, for a moment, do not say that the competent authority under no circumstances can revoke the approval granted 7 under section 10(23C)(iv) of Act. However, for doing

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPT vs. THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

charitable purpose” of the organization (as postulated in section 2(15) of the Act) or if the objectives are marred by a profit making motive that emerges more as a business activity rather than an educational purpose. Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act while guiding the manner of this determination also, provides a certain amount of discretion

SUNSHINE EDUCATIONAL & DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, EXEMPTION, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla

charitable purpose, then for the purpose of Section 11 it has to be treated as trust and income derived from carrying out such obligation has to be reckoned as income derived from property under the trust and therefore, on the ground also as raked by the ld. CIT (A), exemption u/s.11 cannot be denied. Accordingly, in view of the finding

GIAN SAGAR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-27, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 6054/Del./2018 : Asstt. Year : Gian Sagar Educational & Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Charitable Trust, Flat No. 509, Tax, Central Circle-27, 5Th Floor, Indraprakash Building, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg5827B Assessee By : Sh. Amol Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Sunita Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.09.2020

10 Gian Sagar Educational & Charitable Trust cancellation of the registration of the assessee trust by the Pr. CIT is wholly unsustainable in law. It was submitted that u/s 12AA(3) of the Act, registration can be cancelled only when the Principal Commissioner is satisfied that activities of such trust or institution are not genuine or are not being carried

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. ANIKA INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

10(23C) which, it is well settled, is a provision closely interlinked to Section 80-G. Where the two expressions "charitable purpose" and "not for purposes of profit" are used in the same statute, in cognate provisions, even if situated at some distance from each other, they cannot be accorded the same meaning, without due justification. In the present case

CONFRERE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

10(23C). 15. Ld. CIT(A) while denying the exemption of Section 11 to assessee society has held that, since imparting of education is a matter of pure charity, therefore, the educational institution is not permitted to receive or recover the cost of charity from its beneficiary by way of fees, i.e., charging of fees itself would amount uncharitable activity

PATANJALI YOGPEETH (NYAS),DELHI vs. ADIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

section 142(2A) while confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in denying exemption under sections 11/12 of the Act. 8.2 The ld. AR on queries raised by the Bench responded that assessee trust is not running shops or distribution of products and for those shoppings and distribution and selling of products, as on commercial basis different entity is there

M/S. MUSSOORIE DEHRADUN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,DEHRADUN vs. CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result we dismiss the appeal of the assessee

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year:

25 of the Companies Act. 7956 and the objects set out in clauses 5 and 10 of its Memorandum of Association 4. Where the purpose of a trust or institution is relief of the poor, education or medical relief, the requirement of the definition of "charitable purpose" would be fully satisfied even if an activity for profit is carried

POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2016-17

Trust Vs. CIT (E), ITA No. 4136/Del/2017 (Del. Trib.) 18. Strongly relying upon the observations of the departmental authorities as well as Special Auditor, learned Departmental Representative submitted, various details called for by the Assessing Officer were not furnished in course of assessment proceeding relating to assessment year 2016-07. Drawing our attention to the observations of the Assessing Officer