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

13. It becomes pertinent to note that sub-section (3) of Section 11 is concerned with the 85% of income which stands accumulated in terms of the facility provided to charitable institutions by Section 11(2). Section 11(3) prescribes that any income referable to Section 11(2) which is either applied for a purpose other than charitable or religious

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) read with the provisions of section 13(3)(b) of the Act vis-à-vis the letting of properties at the Asif Ali Road and Rajdoot Marg, New Delhi owned by the assessee to another trust, namely, Hamdard Dawakhanna (Wakf) at the rents alleged to be lower than

DCIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI vs. HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) read with the provisions of section 13(3)(b) of the Act vis-à-vis the letting of properties at the Asif Ali Road and Rajdoot Marg, New Delhi owned by the assessee to another trust, namely, Hamdard Dawakhanna (Wakf) at the rents alleged to be lower than

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) read with the provisions of section 13(3)(b) of the Act vis-à-vis the letting of properties at the Asif Ali Road and Rajdoot Marg, New Delhi owned by the assessee to another trust, namely, Hamdard Dawakhanna (Wakf) at the rents alleged to be lower than

HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) read with the provisions of section 13(3)(b) of the Act vis-à-vis the letting of properties at the Asif Ali Road and Rajdoot Marg, New Delhi owned by the assessee to another trust, namely, Hamdard Dawakhanna (Wakf) at the rents alleged to be lower than

ACIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) read with the provisions of section 13(3)(b) of the Act vis-à-vis the letting of properties at the Asif Ali Road and Rajdoot Marg, New Delhi owned by the assessee to another trust, namely, Hamdard Dawakhanna (Wakf) at the rents alleged to be lower than

HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA),NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (E), DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) read with the provisions of section 13(3)(b) of the Act vis-à-vis the letting of properties at the Asif Ali Road and Rajdoot Marg, New Delhi owned by the assessee to another trust, namely, Hamdard Dawakhanna (Wakf) at the rents alleged to be lower than

HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA),NEW DELHI vs. ACIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) read with the provisions of section 13(3)(b) of the Act vis-à-vis the letting of properties at the Asif Ali Road and Rajdoot Marg, New Delhi owned by the assessee to another trust, namely, Hamdard Dawakhanna (Wakf) at the rents alleged to be lower than

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. CHARANJIV CHARITABLE TRUST

In the result both aspects of the first substantial question of law

Bench: It, Two By The Assessee Relating To The Assessment Years 2006-07 & 2007-08 & One By The Revenue Relating To The Assessment Year 2006-07. In Other Words, In Respect Of The Assessment Year 2006-07, There Were Cross- 2014:Dhc:1467-Db

2)(a)/ 13(3), the CIT (Appeals) held that the debit balance arose on account of the desire of the assessee to establish an educational institution (private university) in the State of Chhattisgarh. According to the law prevailing in Chhattisgarh, no society established outside that State could open a private university. In order to overcome this legal hurdle the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)-EXEMPTION, NEW DELHI vs. HAMDARD LABORATORIES (INDIA) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

Sections 11 and 12: a. trust for private religious purposes, which enures no public benefit: [Sec. 13(1)(a)] b. charitable trust created or established on or after 1-4-1962 for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste [Sec. 13(1)(b)] (other than scheduled castes/tribes, back ward classes or women and children). (Explanation 2

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

charitable in section 2(15); and if Appellant trust is imparting education for which it has been granted registration under section 12A, ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 39 then Assessing Officer cannot deny benefit of section 11 and treat the Appellant trust as a business entity on this ground alone. Accordingly, such an observation and finding

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

charitable in section 2(15); and if Appellant trust is imparting education for which it has been granted registration under section 12A, ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 39 then Assessing Officer cannot deny benefit of section 11 and treat the Appellant trust as a business entity on this ground alone. Accordingly, such an observation and finding

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

charitable in section 2(15); and if Appellant trust is imparting education for which it has been granted registration under section 12A, ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 39 then Assessing Officer cannot deny benefit of section 11 and treat the Appellant trust as a business entity on this ground alone. Accordingly, such an observation and finding

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

charitable in section 2(15); and if Appellant trust is imparting education for which it has been granted registration under section 12A, ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 39 then Assessing Officer cannot deny benefit of section 11 and treat the Appellant trust as a business entity on this ground alone. Accordingly, such an observation and finding

ITO (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

charitable in section 2(15); and if Appellant trust is imparting education for which it has been granted registration under section 12A, ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 39 then Assessing Officer cannot deny benefit of section 11 and treat the Appellant trust as a business entity on this ground alone. Accordingly, such an observation and finding

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) DELHI vs. HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA)

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

Section 13(2)(b) of the Act. In this regard, he places reliance on the following judgments: i. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Central III v. Moni Kumar Subba, 2011 SCC OnLine Del 1608; ii. DIT (Exemption) v. Span Foundation, (2009) 178 Taxman 436 (Del); and iii. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Raghubir Saran Charitable Trust

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) DELHI vs. HAMDRD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA)

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

Section 13(2)(b) of the Act. In this regard, he places reliance on the following judgments: i. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Central III v. Moni Kumar Subba, 2011 SCC OnLine Del 1608; ii. DIT (Exemption) v. Span Foundation, (2009) 178 Taxman 436 (Del); and iii. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Raghubir Saran Charitable Trust

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:

B) Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act 1961 "Charitable purpose includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief, and the advancement of any other object of general public utility not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit." (C } Clause 13{bb) inserted w.e.f. 1-4-1977 provided as under; "Nothing contained in section 11 or section