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

Section 127 of the Act dated 15-11-2022. The learned assessing officer i.e. Central Circle 29 Delhi was satisfied that the assessee Lala Sher Singh Memorial Jeevan Vigyan Trust Society Jindal Charitable

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

Section 127 of the Act dated 15-11-2022. The learned assessing officer i.e. Central Circle 29 Delhi was satisfied that the assessee Lala Sher Singh Memorial Jeevan Vigyan Trust Society Jindal Charitable

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

Appeal is allowed

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

127 (ITAT) (Del.); (vii) Trustees of Kilachand Devchand Foundation Vs. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 382 (Bom,.); (viii) R. B. Shreeram Religious & Charitable Trust Vs. CIT (1998) 233 ITR 53 (SC); (ix) Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust Vs. DIT (Exemption) (2008) 171 Taxman 134 (Del.); (x) DIT (E) Vs. Charanjiv Charitable Trust (2014) 43 Taxman.com 300 (Del.); (xi) Mundakapadam Mandirams Society

SUNIL GUPTA,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-55(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraadvantage India Vs. The Pr. C.I.T 101-102, Oriental House Central - 2 Gulmohar Enclave New Delhi New Delhi

Charitable Trust in ITA 6054/Del/2018.The ld AR emphasized that transfer of jurisdiction u/s 127 is made for granting rights to the AO to assess the income of the Trust and it does not grant power to grant/cancel registration to the PCIT(Central). The ld. counsel for the assessee prayed that the order of the PCIT(C) Page

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. SERVICES COMPANIES

In the result the appeals are disposed of as above with no order as to

section 11(1), the permitted accumulation of 25% will also be calculated with reference to this income.” Relying on the circular, it was held by the Madras High Court that the expenditure incurred by a charitable trust by way of payment of tax out of the current year’s income has to be considered as application for charitable purposes because

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOFTWARE AND SERVICE COMPANIES (NASSCOM)

In the result the appeals are disposed of as above with no order as to

section 11(1), the permitted accumulation of 25% will also be calculated with reference to this income.” Relying on the circular, it was held by the Madras High Court that the expenditure incurred by a charitable trust by way of payment of tax out of the current year’s income has to be considered as application for charitable purposes because

JAN ABHIVYAKTI SAMAJIK VIKAS SANSTHA,RAIPUR vs. PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2 NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year: 2024-25] Jan Abhivyankti Samajik Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vikas Sanstha, Lig-1361, (Central)-2, Room No.341, E-2, Sector-8, Housing Board Vs 2Nd Floor, Ara Centre, Colony, Saddu Mova, Raipur- Jhandewalan Extension, 492001 (C.G.) New Delhi-110055 Pan:Aabaj7197B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By Shri Mukesh Kumar Jha, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

127 of the Act is not conceivable. Page 12 of 26 17. At the same as we observed above that the assessment by said assessing officer was completed in September, 2021, thus, there was no occasion for concerned AO to invoke ‘reference’ powers under second proviso to sub-section (3) of section 143 of the Act. It appears that when

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, EXEMPTION RANGE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

127) wherein it is held that the amendment to Section 11 (6) is prospective in nature and applies with effect from 1 April 2015. He therefore submitted that all the issues involved in this appeal are covered in favour of the assessee. 6. With respect to the enhancement made by the learned CIT – A, he submitted that there

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

127) wherein it is held that the amendment to Section 11 (6) is prospective in nature and applies with effect from 1 April 2015. He therefore submitted that all the issues involved in this appeal are covered in favour of the assessee. 6. With respect to the enhancement made by the learned CIT – A, he submitted that there

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

127) wherein it is held that the amendment to Section 11 (6) is prospective in nature and applies with effect from 1 April 2015. He therefore submitted that all the issues involved in this appeal are covered in favour of the assessee. 6. With respect to the enhancement made by the learned CIT – A, he submitted that there

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

127) wherein it is held that the amendment to Section 11 (6) is prospective in nature and applies with effect from 1 April 2015. He therefore submitted that all the issues involved in this appeal are covered in favour of the assessee. 6. With respect to the enhancement made by the learned CIT – A, he submitted that there

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTIONS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

127) wherein it is held that the amendment to Section 11 (6) is prospective in nature and applies with effect from 1 April 2015. He therefore submitted that all the issues involved in this appeal are covered in favour of the assessee. 6. With respect to the enhancement made by the learned CIT – A, he submitted that there

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. FORTUNE SOCIETY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiadit(E), Vs. Fortune Society For Tc-Ii, New Delhi Development & Promotion Of International Business, G-4, Community Centre, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi Pan:Aaatf0849L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 35(2)(iv) of the Act while computing business profit and loss. Secondly, the Supreme Court was not concerned with the case of a charitable trust/institution, and the question as to whether income under the head "profits and gains of business" should be computed on commercial principles in order to determine the amount of income available for application

LAKHMI CHAND CHARITABLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT CENTRAL 3, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Ms.Madhumita Roylakhmi Chand Vs. Principal Commissioner Charitable Society, Of Income Tax, Central-3 Elephanta Lane, Behind Room No. 325, 3Rd Floor, Sector-10/6 Market, New Income Tax Building, E-3 Golak Dham, Sector-10, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Dwarka, Extension, New Delhi - 110075 New Delhi - 110055

trust or institution." Rule 17A P a g e | 20 Lakhmi Chand Charitable Society Vs. Pr.CIT, Central-3 "(5) On receipt of an application in Form No. 10A, the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, authorised by the Board shall pass an order in writing granting registration under clause (a), or clause (c), of sub-section (1) of section 12AB read with

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

127,253,851 82.69% 2008-09 25. Thus, he submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the acquisition of fixed assets and another capital expenditure which were shown in the statement of utilisation filed along with return of income as application of income for ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 22 charitable purposes. He submitted that

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

127,253,851 82.69% 2008-09 25. Thus, he submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the acquisition of fixed assets and another capital expenditure which were shown in the statement of utilisation filed along with return of income as application of income for ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 22 charitable purposes. He submitted that

IILM FOUNDAION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

127,253,851 82.69% 2008-09 25. Thus, he submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the acquisition of fixed assets and another capital expenditure which were shown in the statement of utilisation filed along with return of income as application of income for ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 22 charitable purposes. He submitted that

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

127,253,851 82.69% 2008-09 25. Thus, he submitted that both the authorities have failed to consider the acquisition of fixed assets and another capital expenditure which were shown in the statement of utilisation filed along with return of income as application of income for ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 22 charitable purposes. He submitted that