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)

271(l)(c ) of the Income-tax act, 1961 separately for concealing the particulars of income and furnishing the inaccurate particulars of income. to assessee” 22. The ld CIT(A) has held vide para No. 11.5 of this order that such advances given to the construction contractor do not violate the provisions of section

ITO (E), DELHI vs. SUVASINI CHARITABLE TRUST,, DELHI

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm Ita No. 4330/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Income Tax Officer(E), Vs Suvasini Charitable Trust, Trust Ward-Ii, Swaminarayan Akshardham Delhi Mandir, Nh-24, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafts6497L Assessee By : Sh. K. P. Garg, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Anima Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

Section 2(15) of the Act. He referred to the following case laws: " Jalandhar Development Authority Vs CIT (ITAT Amritsar) " Indian Chamber of Commerce Vs CIT (1975) CIT(SC) 271 " Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority (ITAT Chandigarh) 7 Suvasini Charitable Trust " Small Medium Exporter Vs DIT(E) Delhi (ITAT Delhi) " Sri Sathya Sai Nigamagamam Trust, in ITA No.247/Hyd/2009 (ITAT

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)

Charitable Trust derived from building, plant and machinery and furniture was liable to be computed in normal commercial manner although the Trust may not be carrying on any business and the assets in respect whereof depreciation is claimed may not be business assets. In all such cases, section 32 of the Income-tax Act providing for depreciation for computation

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)

Charitable Trust derived from building, plant and machinery and furniture was liable to be computed in normal commercial manner although the Trust may not be carrying on any business and the assets in respect whereof depreciation is claimed may not be business assets. In all such cases, section 32 of the Income-tax Act providing for depreciation for computation

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)

Charitable Trust derived from building, plant and machinery and furniture was liable to be computed in normal commercial manner although the Trust may not be carrying on any business and the assets in respect whereof depreciation is claimed may not be business assets. In all such cases, section 32 of the Income-tax Act providing for depreciation for computation

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)

Charitable Trust derived from building, plant and machinery and furniture was liable to be computed in normal commercial manner although the Trust may not be carrying on any business and the assets in respect whereof depreciation is claimed may not be business assets. In all such cases, section 32 of the Income-tax Act providing for depreciation for computation

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)

Charitable Trust derived from building, plant and machinery and furniture was liable to be computed in normal commercial manner although the Trust may not be carrying on any business and the assets in respect whereof depreciation is claimed may not be business assets. In all such cases, section 32 of the Income-tax Act providing for depreciation for computation

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. AIPECCS SOCIETY

271(B) of the Act were also initiated. 6.8 In the meantime, on 30th March, 1999, the Assessee filed an application in the prescribed form with DGIT(E) seeking approval under 2015:DHC:8430-DB ITA 705/2008, 924/2009 & W.P.(C) 3797/2011 Page 8 of 71 Section 10(23C)(vi) & (via) for the year 1998-99. 6.9 Aggrieved by the assessment

INSTITUTE OF HAEMATOLOGY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (E), WARD- 1(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 453/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Institute Of Haematology, Vs Income Tax Officer(E), 11/6-B, Shanti Chambers, Pusa Ward-1(2), Road, New Delhi-110005 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati4626P Assessee By : Sh. T. R. Talwar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2018 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 02.08.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-40, Delhi. 2. The Only Grievance Of The Assessee In This Appeal Relates To The Sustenance Of Penalty Of Rs.68,598/- Levied By The Ao U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

Charitable or religious trusts or institutions (copy enclosed PB 1 to 12). In annexure II of the Audit report with the head Application or use of income or property for the benefit 3 Institute of Haematology of persons referred to in section 13(3), the Auditor has mentioned the following facts (PB 10). a) A sum of Rs.16

DCIT, CIRCLE- 20(1), NEW DELHI vs. POLYPLEX CORPORATION LIMITED., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M.Balaganesh[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Dcit, Vs Polyplex Corporation Limited, Circle-20(1), 40, New Mandakini, Greater New Delhi Kailash, New Delhi-110092. Pan-Aaacp0278J Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr.Dr Respondent By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Shri Aman Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing 04.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.04.2024

271(1)(c) not attracted, for merely making of the claim, which is not sustainable in law by itself will not amount furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. In the present case also, the claim of the assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Officer for the sole reason that the assessee could not get the approval from DSIR till completion

INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

271(1)(c) have been separately initiated”. Appeal before the CIT (A) 32. The INC then filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘CIT (A)’]. The appeal was filed on 4th November 1997 along an application under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (‘Rules’). In this application, it was stated that the dates for compliance

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-XI vs. INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS/ALL INDIA CONGRESS COMMITTEE

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

271(1)(c) have been separately initiated”. Appeal before the CIT (A) 32. The INC then filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘CIT (A)’]. The appeal was filed on 4th November 1997 along an application under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (‘Rules’). In this application, it was stated that the dates for compliance

INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

271(1)(c) have been separately initiated”. Appeal before the CIT (A) 32. The INC then filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘CIT (A)’]. The appeal was filed on 4th November 1997 along an application under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (‘Rules’). In this application, it was stated that the dates for compliance

DCIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S SPIRITUAL REGENERATION MOVEMENT FOUNDATION OF INDIA,, NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2011-12

section. Two questions have been considered regarding the application of income (i) Where a trust incurs a debt for the purposes of the trust, whether the repayment of the debt would amount to an application of the income for the purposes of the trust? and (ii) Whether loans advanced by an education trust to students for higher studies would

C.I.T vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO. PVT LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

271 ITR 159, the beneficiaries do not set up a trust and the trustees derive their authority under the terms of the deed of the trust. Therefore neither the trustees nor the beneficiaries could be said to have come together for a common purpose. The beneficiaries merely enjoy the benefit of the trust whereas the function of the trustees

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO. P. LTD.

The appeals stand disposed of

271 ITR 159, the beneficiaries do not set up a trust and the trustees derive their authority under the terms of the deed of the trust. Therefore neither the trustees nor the beneficiaries could be said to have come together for a common purpose. The beneficiaries merely enjoy the benefit of the trust whereas the function of the trustees

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO.P.LTD.

The appeals stand disposed of

271 ITR 159, the beneficiaries do not set up a trust and the trustees derive their authority under the terms of the deed of the trust. Therefore neither the trustees nor the beneficiaries could be said to have come together for a common purpose. The beneficiaries merely enjoy the benefit of the trust whereas the function of the trustees

SHANKER TRADING (P) LTD. vs. THE CIT

The appeals stand disposed of

271 ITR 159, the beneficiaries do not set up a trust and the trustees derive their authority under the terms of the deed of the trust. Therefore neither the trustees nor the beneficiaries could be said to have come together for a common purpose. The beneficiaries merely enjoy the benefit of the trust whereas the function of the trustees

CIT vs. SHANKAR TRADING CO LTD

The appeals stand disposed of

271 ITR 159, the beneficiaries do not set up a trust and the trustees derive their authority under the terms of the deed of the trust. Therefore neither the trustees nor the beneficiaries could be said to have come together for a common purpose. The beneficiaries merely enjoy the benefit of the trust whereas the function of the trustees