DDIT (E), DELHI vs. M/S. ALL INDIA FOOTBALL FEDERATION, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Smt. Beena Pillai

trust fall within the ambit and scope of the expression “general public utility services”, which is a fourth limb of definition of word “charitable” as defined under Section 2(15) of the Act. 18. A reference can be made to the following extract from the Speech of the Minister of Finance on 29.02.2008:— . "180. 'Charitable purpose' includes relief

DCIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. ERNET INDIA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

charitable purposes as per section 2(15) of the Act. In this background, it is required to be examined that whether the assessee trust has dominant and prime objective of making profit and carry on trade, commerce, and business. 17. The thrust has been emphasized by revenue on the agreement entered into by the assessee with the service receiver

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

2)(vilb) on this issue is not adjudicated since full facts are\nneeded for proper adjudication. In other words, this ground is dismissed as not\nadjudicated.\nTherefore, the addition of Rs.418,66,34,625 u/s.56(2)(viib) made by the\nFAO/NFAC is fully restored in its entirety by treating the Rectification Order\ndated 17th Jan 2020 passed u/s.154

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ERNET INDIA, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

charitable purposes as per section 2(15) of the Act. In this background, it is required to be examined that whether the assessee trust has dominant and prime objective of making profit and carry on trade, commerce, and business. 17. The thrust has been emphasized by revenue on the agreement entered into by the assessee with the service receiver

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ERNET INDIA, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

charitable purposes as per section 2(15) of the Act. In this background, it is required to be examined that whether the assessee trust has dominant and prime objective of making profit and carry on trade, commerce, and business. 17. The thrust has been emphasized by revenue on the agreement entered into by the assessee with the service receiver

FLORENCE NIGHTINGALE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,DELHI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-3, DELHI

In the result, the assessees‟ appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshlala Sher Singh Memorial Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Jeevan Vigyan Trust Society, Jhandewalan, New Plot No. 18, Sector-22, Phase-1, Delhi Dwarka, Delhi-110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaal2241H Jindal Charitable Society, Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Ps-2, C-3, Block, Phase-Ii, Jhandewalan, New Ashok Vihar, Delhi- 110052 Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaatj0588L Florence Nighingale Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Educational Society, Jhandewalan, New Sector-16B, Phase-I, Haf Delhi Pocket-A, Sector-22, Delhi- 110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaaf1097R

Trust Society Jindal Charitable Society Florence Nighingale Educational Society PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The instant batch of 3 appeals of different assessees‟ is for AY 2024- 25. Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. The facts

LALA SHER SINGH MEMORIAL JEEVAN VIGYAN TRUST SOCIETY,DELHI vs. PCIT (CENTRAL)-3, JHANDEWALAN NEW DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the assessees‟ appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshlala Sher Singh Memorial Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Jeevan Vigyan Trust Society, Jhandewalan, New Plot No. 18, Sector-22, Phase-1, Delhi Dwarka, Delhi-110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaal2241H Jindal Charitable Society, Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Ps-2, C-3, Block, Phase-Ii, Jhandewalan, New Ashok Vihar, Delhi- 110052 Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaatj0588L Florence Nighingale Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Educational Society, Jhandewalan, New Sector-16B, Phase-I, Haf Delhi Pocket-A, Sector-22, Delhi- 110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaaf1097R

Trust Society Jindal Charitable Society Florence Nighingale Educational Society PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The instant batch of 3 appeals of different assessees‟ is for AY 2024- 25. Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. The facts

JINDAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY,DELHI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL)-3, DELHI

In the result, the assessees‟ appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshlala Sher Singh Memorial Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Jeevan Vigyan Trust Society, Jhandewalan, New Plot No. 18, Sector-22, Phase-1, Delhi Dwarka, Delhi-110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaal2241H Jindal Charitable Society, Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Ps-2, C-3, Block, Phase-Ii, Jhandewalan, New Ashok Vihar, Delhi- 110052 Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaatj0588L Florence Nighingale Vs. Pcit(Central)-3, Educational Society, Jhandewalan, New Sector-16B, Phase-I, Haf Delhi Pocket-A, Sector-22, Delhi- 110075 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaaaf1097R

Trust Society Jindal Charitable Society Florence Nighingale Educational Society PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The instant batch of 3 appeals of different assessees‟ is for AY 2024- 25. Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. The facts

ACIT, MEERUT vs. M/S. SPACE AGE RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST, MEERUT

In the result Ground No. 1 and 3 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed and ground No

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Space Age Research & Vs. Circle-2, Meerut Technology Foundation, Charitable Trust, Railway Road, Meerut Pan: Aabts7321M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Charitable Trust, Circle-2, Meerut Railway Road, Meerut PAN: AABTS7321M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Sanjeev Sapra, Adv Revenue by: Sh. SS Rana, CIT DR Date of Hearing 02/05/2017 Date of pronouncement 23/05/2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. ITA No. 4622/Del/2012 is filed by the revenue against the order of ld CIT(A), Meerut

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-XI vs. INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS/ALL INDIA CONGRESS COMMITTEE

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

charitable trust.’ Treating the income of a political party to be that of a Trust and using the same principle to test the treatment of its expenses is inconsistent with the very scheme of the Act. 70. It is clear, therefore, that for understanding and interpreting Section 13A of the Act, it would serve no purpose to compare it with

INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

charitable trust.’ Treating the income of a political party to be that of a Trust and using the same principle to test the treatment of its expenses is inconsistent with the very scheme of the Act. 70. It is clear, therefore, that for understanding and interpreting Section 13A of the Act, it would serve no purpose to compare it with

INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

charitable trust.’ Treating the income of a political party to be that of a Trust and using the same principle to test the treatment of its expenses is inconsistent with the very scheme of the Act. 70. It is clear, therefore, that for understanding and interpreting Section 13A of the Act, it would serve no purpose to compare it with

CHURCH'S AUXILIARY FOR SOCIAL ACTION,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

119(2)(b) of the IT Act condoning the delay in filing the form No.10AA for AY 2010-11 vide order dated 18/19.12.2019. 11. The ld. Counsel submitted that the only reason for which the addition was made by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A) was due to belated filing of Form No.10AA. He submitted that since

ACIT (E), CIRCLE- 2(1), NEW DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

119 (Cochin Trib.) - Employers’ Federation of Southern India vs. ADIT(E)-III, Chennai (2017) 88 taxman.com 751 (Chennai-Trib.) - CIT vs. Sree Anjaneya Medical (2016) 74 taxamann.com 243 (SC). - ACIT vs. Grama Vidiyal Trust (2016) 71 taxamann.com 88 (Chennai –Trib.) - DCIT (Exemptions)-II, Chennai vs. Chennai Kammavar Trust (2017) 81 taxmann.com 365 (Chennai-Trib.) - ITO (E), Chennai vs. FRP Institute

SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. DIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

119 (Cochin Trib.) - Employers’ Federation of Southern India vs. ADIT(E)-III, Chennai (2017) 88 taxman.com 751 (Chennai-Trib.) - CIT vs. Sree Anjaneya Medical (2016) 74 taxamann.com 243 (SC). - ACIT vs. Grama Vidiyal Trust (2016) 71 taxamann.com 88 (Chennai –Trib.) - DCIT (Exemptions)-II, Chennai vs. Chennai Kammavar Trust (2017) 81 taxmann.com 365 (Chennai-Trib.) - ITO (E), Chennai vs. FRP Institute

ACIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

119 (Cochin Trib.) - Employers’ Federation of Southern India vs. ADIT(E)-III, Chennai (2017) 88 taxman.com 751 (Chennai-Trib.) - CIT vs. Sree Anjaneya Medical (2016) 74 taxamann.com 243 (SC). - ACIT vs. Grama Vidiyal Trust (2016) 71 taxamann.com 88 (Chennai –Trib.) - DCIT (Exemptions)-II, Chennai vs. Chennai Kammavar Trust (2017) 81 taxmann.com 365 (Chennai-Trib.) - ITO (E), Chennai vs. FRP Institute

ACIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

119 (Cochin Trib.) - Employers’ Federation of Southern India vs. ADIT(E)-III, Chennai (2017) 88 taxman.com 751 (Chennai-Trib.) - CIT vs. Sree Anjaneya Medical (2016) 74 taxamann.com 243 (SC). - ACIT vs. Grama Vidiyal Trust (2016) 71 taxamann.com 88 (Chennai –Trib.) - DCIT (Exemptions)-II, Chennai vs. Chennai Kammavar Trust (2017) 81 taxmann.com 365 (Chennai-Trib.) - ITO (E), Chennai vs. FRP Institute

SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE- 2(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

119 (Cochin Trib.) - Employers’ Federation of Southern India vs. ADIT(E)-III, Chennai (2017) 88 taxman.com 751 (Chennai-Trib.) - CIT vs. Sree Anjaneya Medical (2016) 74 taxamann.com 243 (SC). - ACIT vs. Grama Vidiyal Trust (2016) 71 taxamann.com 88 (Chennai –Trib.) - DCIT (Exemptions)-II, Chennai vs. Chennai Kammavar Trust (2017) 81 taxmann.com 365 (Chennai-Trib.) - ITO (E), Chennai vs. FRP Institute