DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAY TRUST

Inasmuch as all that is required is for the settler of the trust to declare that the

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

charitable objects. There is no settlement of the business in Katha upon trust for the simple reason that the business itself was not in existence at the time of formation of the trust. The property held under trust was merely a sum of2,100/-, contributed more or less equally by the settlors at the time of creation of trust

CIT vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST

Inasmuch as all that is required is for the settler of the trust to declare that the

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

charitable objects. There is no settlement of the business in Katha upon trust for the simple reason that the business itself was not in existence at the time of formation of the trust. The property held under trust was merely a sum of2,100/-, contributed more or less equally by the settlors at the time of creation of trust

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAY TRUST

Inasmuch as all that is required is for the settler of the trust to declare that the

charitable objects. There is no settlement of the business in Katha upon trust for the simple reason that the business itself was not in existence at the time of formation of the trust. The property held under trust was merely a sum of2,100/-, contributed more or less equally by the settlors at the time of creation of trust

CIT vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST

Inasmuch as all that is required is for the settler of the trust to declare that the

charitable objects. There is no settlement of the business in Katha upon trust for the simple reason that the business itself was not in existence at the time of formation of the trust. The property held under trust was merely a sum of2,100/-, contributed more or less equally by the settlors at the time of creation of trust

CIT vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJNALAYA TRUST

Inasmuch as all that is required is for the settler of the trust to declare that the

charitable objects. There is no settlement of the business in Katha upon trust for the simple reason that the business itself was not in existence at the time of formation of the trust. The property held under trust was merely a sum of2,100/-, contributed more or less equally by the settlors at the time of creation of trust

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

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

DCIT (EXEMPTION), UTTAR PRADESH vs. M/S. DIVYA YOG MANDIR TRUST, HARIDWAR

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

3. Assessee carried the matter by way of filing an appeal before the ld. CIT (A) who has partly allowed the relief by following the decision rendered by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2009-10. Feeling aggrieved, the Revenue has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 4. We have heard

ANAND EDUCATION SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (E), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 761/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Anand Education Society, Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax(E) 30, Community Centre, Ashok Trust Circle-Ii, Vihar, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110052 (Appellant) (Respondent)

226 (Raj) E. ITO Vs Trilok Tirath Vidavati Chuttani Charitable Trust 90 ITD 569 (Chd) F. Ananda Marga Pracharaka Sangha Vs CIT 218 ITR 254 (Cal.) 4. The Assessing Officer has denied the exemption u/s. 11 of the IT Act, 1961 to the society for violation of the provision of section 13(3

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. ANAND EDUCATION SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 761/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Anand Education Society, Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax(E) 30, Community Centre, Ashok Trust Circle-Ii, Vihar, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110052 (Appellant) (Respondent)

226 (Raj) E. ITO Vs Trilok Tirath Vidavati Chuttani Charitable Trust 90 ITD 569 (Chd) F. Ananda Marga Pracharaka Sangha Vs CIT 218 ITR 254 (Cal.) 4. The Assessing Officer has denied the exemption u/s. 11 of the IT Act, 1961 to the society for violation of the provision of section 13(3

URMILA DEVI CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D.Agrawal, Before Shri G. D.Agrawal & Before Shri G. Before Shri G. D.Agrawal, D.Agrawal & Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Charitable Vs. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Commissioner of Income Tax Trust, Trust, Trust, Trust, (Exemptions), (Exemptions), (Exemptions), (Exemptions), R-9/42, Raj Nagar, 9/42, Raj Nagar, 9/42, Raj Nagar, 9/42, Raj Nagar, T.C. 46V, U.P. State Construction & T.C. 46V, U.P. State Construction & T.C. 46V, U.P. State Construction & T.C. 46V, U.P. State Construction & Gha Ghaziabad, Gha Gha ziabad, ziabad, ziabad

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1, DELHI vs. M/S BIO-RAD LABORATORIES (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

Section 12 of NCTE Act, 1993 it shall be the duty of the Council to take all such steps as it may think fit for ensuring planned and co-ordinated development of Teacher Education.  There are approximately 430 applications for various Teacher Education Programmes, other than Diploma level courses, pending at different stages in the RCs.  NEP 2020 has brought

ADDL. CIT, MEERUT vs. M/S SUBHARTI K.K.B CHARITABLE TRUST, MEERUT

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue are allowed

Bench: Sh. Cm Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

3. In the grounds raised by the Revenue, the effective ground is in respect of allowing rectification by the Ld. Commissioner of income tax (Appeals) holding that the trust deed of 1995 was supplementary to the originally created trust of 1991 in view of the order of the Hon’ble civil judge and the judgement of the Hon’ble High

ADDL. CIT, MEERUT vs. M/S SUBHARTI K.K.B CHARITABLE TRUST, MEERUT

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue are allowed

Bench: Sh. Cm Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

3. In the grounds raised by the Revenue, the effective ground is in respect of allowing rectification by the Ld. Commissioner of income tax (Appeals) holding that the trust deed of 1995 was supplementary to the originally created trust of 1991 in view of the order of the Hon’ble civil judge and the judgement of the Hon’ble High

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Ito, Vs. M/S. Dlf Ltd., Ward-74(4), Aaykar Bhawan, Dlf Centre, 9Th Floor, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi Sansad Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Praveen Kumar, Sr.Dr Respondent By Shri Satyajeet Goel, Ca

3 to 6 of the paper book. The certificates have been issued keeping in mind that the recipient charitable trust are exempted from tax and the deducting of tax by the assessee and again claiming refund by the trust would only be futile exercise of utilizing resources of the Income-tax Department without any ultimate collection of taxes. The certificate