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

2)(c) there is no bar on payment of salary, etc., to the persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act for the services rendered by such persons. The law only provides that if payment is made to persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act in respect of services rendered by such persons, the same should

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

2)(c) there is no bar on payment of salary, etc., to the persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act for the services rendered by such persons. The law only provides that if payment is made to persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act in respect of services rendered by such persons, the same should

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

2)(c) there is no bar on payment of salary, etc., to the persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act for the services rendered by such persons. The law only provides that if payment is made to persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act in respect of services rendered by such persons, the same should

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

2)(c) there is no bar on payment of salary, etc., to the persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act for the services rendered by such persons. The law only provides that if payment is made to persons mentioned in section 13(3) of the Act in respect of services rendered by such persons, the same should

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 or religious institution, any income thereof, if for any period during the previous year- (i) any funds of the trust or institution are invested or deposited after the 28th day of February, 1983, otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of section 11 ; or (ii) any funds

FEDERATION OF EUROPEAN BUSINESS IN INDIA,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishrafederation Of European Commissioner Of Income Business In India, Tax (Exemption), Aiwan-E-Ghalib Complex, Vs. E-2, Civic Centre, Mata Sundari Lane, Minto Road, Minto Road, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110002 Pan: Aafcf5934N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Amol Sinha, Advocate Sh. Ankit Kumar, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Jitender Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 15/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 03/12/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 06.03.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), New Delhi [‘Cit(E)’].

253 page 82. The Hon’ble Court has held as under: “A.3. Generally, the charging of any amount towards consideration for such an activity (advancing general public utility), which is on cost-basis or nominally above cost, cannot be considered to be trade, commerce or business or any services in relation thereto, it is only when the charges are markedly

HARISH CHAND RAM KALI CHARITABLE TRUST,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, we allow appeal of the assessee partly

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri Prashant Maharishiharish Chand Ram Kali Vs. The Addl Commissioner Of Charitable Trust Income Tax Kf-91, Kavi Nagar Range-1 Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Up Up Pan: Aath3018B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Trust versus CIT [101 ITR 234] and held that hostel running and Mess running activity cannot be stated to be educational activity because educational activity Delhi Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd Vs. ITO, means systematic education. Thereafter he proceeded to examine the expenditure of the assessee on hostel and mess activities. Thereafter, he noted that assessee has claimed ₹ 37924668/– against

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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2001-02

2(24)(iv) of the Act. Since the assessee was allotted 16 Lacs shares in EHIRC, an addition of Rs.88,11,30,349 /- ( 80% of the book value of assets of EHIRC at Rs.110,14,12,937/-) was made in the hands of the assessee for the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer mentioned in the assessment order that

DCIT,(E) CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Delhi Development Authority, Vs Jcit(Exemption), Room No.205, B-Block, Vikas Range-1, New Delhi Sadan, Ina, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Dcit(Exemption), Vs Delhi Development Authority, Central Cirlce-1(1), B-Block, Vikas Sadan, Ina New Delhi Colony, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Dcit(Exemption), Vs Delhi Development Authority, Circle-1(1), B-Block, Vikas Sadan, Ina New Delhi Colony, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Anubhav Goel, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2025 Order

253. In view of the foregoing discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are recorded regarding the interpretation of the changed ITA Nos.6894, 7072 & 7073/Del/2018 definition of “charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 01.04.2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act. A. General test under Section 2(15) A.1. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general

DCIT,(E) CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Delhi Development Authority, Vs Jcit(Exemption), Room No.205, B-Block, Vikas Range-1, New Delhi Sadan, Ina, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Dcit(Exemption), Vs Delhi Development Authority, Central Cirlce-1(1), B-Block, Vikas Sadan, Ina New Delhi Colony, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Dcit(Exemption), Vs Delhi Development Authority, Circle-1(1), B-Block, Vikas Sadan, Ina New Delhi Colony, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Anubhav Goel, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2025 Order

253. In view of the foregoing discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are recorded regarding the interpretation of the changed ITA Nos.6894, 7072 & 7073/Del/2018 definition of “charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 01.04.2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act. A. General test under Section 2(15) A.1. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT(E), RANGE- 1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Delhi Development Authority, Vs Jcit(Exemption), Room No.205, B-Block, Vikas Range-1, New Delhi Sadan, Ina, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Dcit(Exemption), Vs Delhi Development Authority, Central Cirlce-1(1), B-Block, Vikas Sadan, Ina New Delhi Colony, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Dcit(Exemption), Vs Delhi Development Authority, Circle-1(1), B-Block, Vikas Sadan, Ina New Delhi Colony, New Delhi-110023. Pan-Aaald0031A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Anubhav Goel, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Monika Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.07.2025 Order

253. In view of the foregoing discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are recorded regarding the interpretation of the changed ITA Nos.6894, 7072 & 7073/Del/2018 definition of “charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 01.04.2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act. A. General test under Section 2(15) A.1. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ANGOORI DEVI EDUCATIONAL & CURTURAL SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, appeal filed by the ld AO is dismissed

Bench: Smt Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit(E), Vs. Smt. Angoori Devi Circle-2(1), Educational & Cultural New Delhi Society, 88A, Pocket-1, Mayor Vihar, Phase-1, New Delhi Pan: Aaata1505E (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 70-74 applies to aggregation of losses and set off and carry forward of the same. Income of the trust is computed u/s 11 -13 of the act and is not hit by those provisions. Hence, we dismiss this ground of appeal holding that excess application in earlier year should be allowed for set off to the charitable trust

DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD, UTTAR PRADESH vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI, UTTAR PRADESH

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. Nos. 2689, 2690, 2691, 2692 & 2693 /Del/2023 (Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Jhansi Development Income Tax, Exemption- Authority, Circle, Ghaziabad, Uttar Commissionery Campus, Pradesh Jhansi Railway Station S.O. Jhansi - Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aaalj 0068 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

253. In view of the foregoing discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are recorded regarding the interpretation of the changed definition of “charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 01.04.2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act. A. General test under Section 2(15) A.1. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general public utility cannot engage

DCIT, EXEMPTION, CIRCLE GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD UTTARPRADESH vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI, UTTARPRADESH

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. Nos. 2689, 2690, 2691, 2692 & 2693 /Del/2023 (Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Jhansi Development Income Tax, Exemption- Authority, Circle, Ghaziabad, Uttar Commissionery Campus, Pradesh Jhansi Railway Station S.O. Jhansi - Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aaalj 0068 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

253. In view of the foregoing discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are recorded regarding the interpretation of the changed definition of “charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 01.04.2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act. A. General test under Section 2(15) A.1. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general public utility cannot engage

DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD, UTTAR PRADESH vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI, UTTAR PRADESH

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. Nos. 2689, 2690, 2691, 2692 & 2693 /Del/2023 (Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Jhansi Development Income Tax, Exemption- Authority, Circle, Ghaziabad, Uttar Commissionery Campus, Pradesh Jhansi Railway Station S.O. Jhansi - Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aaalj 0068 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

253. In view of the foregoing discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are recorded regarding the interpretation of the changed definition of “charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 01.04.2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act. A. General test under Section 2(15) A.1. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general public utility cannot engage

DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD, UTTAR PRADESH vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI, UTTAR PRADESH

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. Nos. 2689, 2690, 2691, 2692 & 2693 /Del/2023 (Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Jhansi Development Income Tax, Exemption- Authority, Circle, Ghaziabad, Uttar Commissionery Campus, Pradesh Jhansi Railway Station S.O. Jhansi - Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aaalj 0068 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

253. In view of the foregoing discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are recorded regarding the interpretation of the changed definition of “charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 01.04.2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act. A. General test under Section 2(15) A.1. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general public utility cannot engage

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION-CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD, UTTAR PRADESH vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI, UTTAR PRADESH

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. Nos. 2689, 2690, 2691, 2692 & 2693 /Del/2023 (Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Jhansi Development Income Tax, Exemption- Authority, Circle, Ghaziabad, Uttar Commissionery Campus, Pradesh Jhansi Railway Station S.O. Jhansi - Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aaalj 0068 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

253. In view of the foregoing discussion and analysis, the following conclusions are recorded regarding the interpretation of the changed definition of “charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 01.04.2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act. A. General test under Section 2(15) A.1. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general public utility cannot engage

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

Charitable Vs. ACIT, Trust, Circle-Panipat C/o- M/s. Sohan Lal Veer Bhan, Shop no. 50, New Wool Market, Panipat (Haryana) PAN :AAATB9939P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. K. Sampath, Advocate Sh. V. Rajkumar, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 30.05.2022 Date of pronouncement 27.07.2022 ORDER Captioned appeals by the same assessee arise