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

194-I, therefore, he held that the same is to be disallowed as per section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Accordingly, he also disallowed lease rent of Rs.3,71,212/-. Consequently, he computed the income of the hostel activities in the following manner :- “Subject to above remarks the income from hostel activities is calculated as under :- Loss from hostel

M/S. SCIENTIFIC AND EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, GURGAON

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri L.P. Sahu, A.M.

charitable purposes. The exemption can be lost if application of income is for purpose other than education [Maa Saraswati Education Trust vs. UOI (2010) 194 Taxman 84 (HP)]”. 17 ITA.No.4944 & 4430/Del./2012 The Scientific and Educational Advancement Society, Gurgaon. 5. The Ld. D.R. relied upon the Order of the A.O. and submitted that though the issue is same

ACIT, GURGAON vs. M/S. THE SCIENTIFIC & EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT SOCIETY, GURGAON

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri L.P. Sahu, A.M.

charitable purposes. The exemption can be lost if application of income is for purpose other than education [Maa Saraswati Education Trust vs. UOI (2010) 194 Taxman 84 (HP)]”. 17 ITA.No.4944 & 4430/Del./2012 The Scientific and Educational Advancement Society, Gurgaon. 5. The Ld. D.R. relied upon the Order of the A.O. and submitted that though the issue is same

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)

charitable in nature and within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 5. During assessment proceedings ld. AO enquired about the object, activity, receipt of fees, TDS its reconciliation with form no 26AS, service tax payments and its nature, details of donors/ contributors etc. There was huge communication by the assessee, which we will come

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

Charitable Trust) came into existence with effect from 01.04.2001. The said trust was registered under Section 12A of the Act by an order dated 01.02.2001. The name of the trust was changed to IILM Foundation [Assessee] by amendment of the trust deed dated 26.07.2007. The said change was also duly registered with the concerned income tax authority. 5. The Assessee

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

Charitable Trust) came into existence with effect from 01.04.2001. The said trust was registered under Section 12A of the Act by an order dated 01.02.2001. The name of the trust was changed to IILM Foundation [Assessee] by amendment of the trust deed dated 26.07.2007. The said change was also duly registered with the concerned income tax authority. 5. The Assessee

M/S SOCIETY FOR PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH IN ASIA,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (E), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Society For Participatory Research In Vs. Income Tax Officer(E), Trust Ward-Iii, Asia, 42,Tughlakabad Instutional Area, New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aaats1994H (Appellant) (Respondent)

charitable purpose defined in section 2(15) of the Act and therefore, benefit of section 11 and 12 of the Act was not allowed to the appellant in the instant year. 4.2 On appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the denial of exemption by holding as under: “3.1 To verify the claim of the appellant, I have gone through the Schedule

ICRW GROUP GRATUITY TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2018-19 Assessment Year 2021-22 Icrw Group Gratuity Trust, Vs Cit (Exemptions), C-59, Ground Floor, Delhi. South Extension Part Ii, New Delhi 110 049 Pan: Aabti3510L Assessment Year: 2020-21 Iclei South Asia Group Gratuity Trust, Vs Cit (Exemptions), C-3, Lower Ground Floor, Delhi Green Park Extension, New Delhi – 110 016. Pan: Aabti7567H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anand Chaudhuri, Advocate Revenue By : Sh. Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari,Cit,Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.06.2023

trust could not be considered as a charitable purpose within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act, we find that this issue has been addressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT (Exemption) vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority & Ors in Civil Appeal No.21762 of 2017 dated 19.10.2022 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court

ICLEI SOUTH ASIA GROUP GRATUITY TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2018-19 Assessment Year 2021-22 Icrw Group Gratuity Trust, Vs Cit (Exemptions), C-59, Ground Floor, Delhi. South Extension Part Ii, New Delhi 110 049 Pan: Aabti3510L Assessment Year: 2020-21 Iclei South Asia Group Gratuity Trust, Vs Cit (Exemptions), C-3, Lower Ground Floor, Delhi Green Park Extension, New Delhi – 110 016. Pan: Aabti7567H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anand Chaudhuri, Advocate Revenue By : Sh. Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari,Cit,Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.06.2023

trust could not be considered as a charitable purpose within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act, we find that this issue has been addressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT (Exemption) vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority & Ors in Civil Appeal No.21762 of 2017 dated 19.10.2022 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. AIPECCS SOCIETY

charitable or religious purposes; but was claiming benefit of section 10(22) of the Act, which provided a specific exemption to certain educational institutions. Therefore, the provisions of Section 139(4A) of the Act, which required an Assessee claiming benefit under sections 11 and 12 of the Act to file a return if its income exceeded the maximum amount

DLF LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri K.N. Chary.

Charitable Trust. 26. Whether the CIT(A) under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 4200000/- made by the AO on a/c of disallowance of expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 1961 for non deduction of Domestic payments towards consultancy fees paid for soil investigation

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DLF LTD.,, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri K.N. Chary.

Charitable Trust. 26. Whether the CIT(A) under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 4200000/- made by the AO on a/c of disallowance of expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act, 1961 for non deduction of Domestic payments towards consultancy fees paid for soil investigation

UMAK EDUCATION TRUST,DELHI vs. JCIT (E), RANGE- 2 , DELHI

Bench: Shri Anil Chatrurvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmaumak Education Trust, Vs. Jcit(E), S-135, Greater Kailash Ii, Range-2, New Delhi Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaatu2598P

section 11 (4A), the profit and gain from the business carried out by the charitable institution will not be exempt unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or institution. 7. Ld. AO taking into consideration the judgment of the Hon’ble Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of GSI India

ACTION ALLIANCE FOR RECYCLING BEVERAGE CARTONS ('AARC'),NEW DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. K. N. Chary

194 by M/s. Hazelwood Private Limited and TDS of Rs.80,000/- each has been deducted by M/s. Parag Milk Foods Limited and United Spirits Limited. He, therefore, held that the amount of Rs. 24 lacs received from M/s. Parag Milk Foods Private Limited and M/s. Hazelwood Private Limited were not the membership fee or annual fee but an amount received

ACTION ALLIANCE FOR RECYCLING BEVERAGE CARTONS ('AARC'),NEW DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. K. N. Chary

194 by M/s. Hazelwood Private Limited and TDS of Rs.80,000/- each has been deducted by M/s. Parag Milk Foods Limited and United Spirits Limited. He, therefore, held that the amount of Rs. 24 lacs received from M/s. Parag Milk Foods Private Limited and M/s. Hazelwood Private Limited were not the membership fee or annual fee but an amount received

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DLF LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 41(1) the assessee should have obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever, any amount in respect of the loss or expenditure earlier allowed as a deduction. This part of the reasoning, in the light of the amended clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 41 may not be relevant after substitution of the said

DLF LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 41(1) the assessee should have obtained, whether in cash or in any other manner whatsoever, any amount in respect of the loss or expenditure earlier allowed as a deduction. This part of the reasoning, in the light of the amended clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 41 may not be relevant after substitution of the said

ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. CONSUMER ELECTRONICS & APPLIANCES MANUFACTURES ASSOCIATION, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh

194/(2012) 28 taxmann.com 61. The CIT(A) proceeded to allow relief to the assessee holding as under:- “4.1.5. In view of the discussion above and respectfully following the decision of my Ld. Predecessor for assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 in appellant’s own case, it is held that the assessee is not involved any trade