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

Charitable Trust Vs. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) (Delhi), (2008) 297 ITR 66, the assessing officer took the view that there was a violation of Section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with Section 13(2) read with Section 13(3)(e). These findings were not accepted either by the CIT (Appeals) who decided the appeal for the assessment year

LAKHMI CHAND CHARITABLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT CENTRAL 3, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Ms.Madhumita Roylakhmi Chand Vs. Principal Commissioner Charitable Society, Of Income Tax, Central-3 Elephanta Lane, Behind Room No. 325, 3Rd Floor, Sector-10/6 Market, New Income Tax Building, E-3 Golak Dham, Sector-10, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Dwarka, Extension, New Delhi - 110075 New Delhi - 110055

35. The amended Section 12AB (4) of the Act, does not consider a violation of Section 13(1)(c) of the Act as "specified violations". No allegations of "specified violation" have been averred against the Appellant in the Show Cause Notices. Consequently, the registration cannot be cancelled on the grounds that the Assessee has allegedly violated Section 13(1

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. FORTUNE SOCIETY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS, NEW DELHI

In the result ground No. 2

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiadit(E), Vs. Fortune Society For Tc-Ii, New Delhi Development & Promotion Of International Business, G-4, Community Centre, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi Pan:Aaatf0849L (Appellant) (Respondent)

ii) of sub- section (1)] of section 32 for the same or any subsequent previous year." 13. The language of the sub-clause c to Section 35(2B) is conspicuous and entirely different and wordings are clear and lucid. The language of Section 11(1), as noticed above, is distinguished and not worded in a similar manner. In Escorts

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Charitable Trust vs State of Haryana AIR [2003] SC 1648 and Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs Hansraj Bhai [2001] 5 SCL 175, it was submitted that it is well-settled that in relation to the same subject matter, if different words/terminology of different import are used in the same statute then there is a presumption that they are not used

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed to the extent as mentioned above on the preliminary issue and the departmental appeal is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.J.S.Reddyi.T.A .No.-3304/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, Corporate Office, Taxation Section, Circle-2(1), Room No.-398, First Floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, Janpath, New Delhi-1110001. New Delhi Pan-Aabcb5576G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Charitable Trust vs State of Haryana AIR [2003] SC 1648 and Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. vs Hansraj Bhai [2001] 5 SCL 175, it was submitted that it is well-settled that in relation to the same subject matter, if different words/terminology of different import are used in the same statute then there is a presumption that they are not used

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOFTWARE AND SERVICE COMPANIES (NASSCOM)

In the result the appeals are disposed of as above with no order as to

charitable purposes. The substantial question of law is thus answered in favour of the assessee in so far as the payment of taxes under the VDIS is concerned and in favour of the Revenue so far as the expenditure incurred outside India (Germany) is concerned. 32. The next question which arises is regarding the applicability of Section

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. SERVICES COMPANIES

In the result the appeals are disposed of as above with no order as to

charitable purposes. The substantial question of law is thus answered in favour of the assessee in so far as the payment of taxes under the VDIS is concerned and in favour of the Revenue so far as the expenditure incurred outside India (Germany) is concerned. 32. The next question which arises is regarding the applicability of Section

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, , CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

II Second Avenue Anna Nagar, 2nd floor, ARTO Complex Chennai, Tamil Nadu Secrtor-33, Noida, PAN: AAETS3783L Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2289/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) ITA No. 2291/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Saraswati Ammal Educational of Income Tax, And Charitable Trust , Plot 5107, RTO Complex, Aayakar H-2, Second Avenue Anna Nagar, Bhawan, Sector-33, Chennai

SARASWATHI AMMAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRE CIRCLE II, NOIDA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

II Second Avenue Anna Nagar, 2nd floor, ARTO Complex Chennai, Tamil Nadu Secrtor-33, Noida, PAN: AAETS3783L Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2289/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) ITA No. 2291/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Saraswati Ammal Educational of Income Tax, And Charitable Trust , Plot 5107, RTO Complex, Aayakar H-2, Second Avenue Anna Nagar, Bhawan, Sector-33, Chennai

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

II Second Avenue Anna Nagar, 2nd floor, ARTO Complex Chennai, Tamil Nadu Secrtor-33, Noida, PAN: AAETS3783L Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2289/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) ITA No. 2291/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Saraswati Ammal Educational of Income Tax, And Charitable Trust , Plot 5107, RTO Complex, Aayakar H-2, Second Avenue Anna Nagar, Bhawan, Sector-33, Chennai

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

II Second Avenue Anna Nagar, 2nd floor, ARTO Complex Chennai, Tamil Nadu Secrtor-33, Noida, PAN: AAETS3783L Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2289/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) ITA No. 2291/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Saraswati Ammal Educational of Income Tax, And Charitable Trust , Plot 5107, RTO Complex, Aayakar H-2, Second Avenue Anna Nagar, Bhawan, Sector-33, Chennai

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

II Second Avenue Anna Nagar, 2nd floor, ARTO Complex Chennai, Tamil Nadu Secrtor-33, Noida, PAN: AAETS3783L Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2289/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) ITA No. 2291/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Saraswati Ammal Educational of Income Tax, And Charitable Trust , Plot 5107, RTO Complex, Aayakar H-2, Second Avenue Anna Nagar, Bhawan, Sector-33, Chennai

NATASHA CHOPRA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), DELHI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

II Second Avenue Anna Nagar, 2nd floor, ARTO Complex Chennai, Tamil Nadu Secrtor-33, Noida, PAN: AAETS3783L Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent ITA No. 2289/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) ITA No. 2291/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Vs. Saraswati Ammal Educational of Income Tax, And Charitable Trust , Plot 5107, RTO Complex, Aayakar H-2, Second Avenue Anna Nagar, Bhawan, Sector-33, Chennai

GIAN SAGAR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-27, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 6054/Del./2018 : Asstt. Year : Gian Sagar Educational & Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Charitable Trust, Flat No. 509, Tax, Central Circle-27, 5Th Floor, Indraprakash Building, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg5827B Assessee By : Sh. Amol Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Sunita Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.09.2020

ii) of para 4 of trust deed, simultaneously, violating the provision of Section 2(15) of the I.T. Act while carring out of its activity. The society was established with the sole intention of helping charitable and philanthropic venture of running of medical college and thereby seeking to claim exemption on the income so generated under section

MOOL CHAND KHAIRATI RAM TRUST vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)

The appeal is disposed of

charitable or not. However, the same would not preclude the AO from examining whether the income derived from the property held in Trust have been applied for the object of the Trust. It is necessary for the AO to conduct this exercise for each assessment year and the grant of registration under Section 12A of the Act would not prevent

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

35. We have heard the rival submissions and also perused the relevant findings given in the impugned orders as well as material referred to before us. The main issues involved are; firstly, remuneration paid to Mrs. Malavika Rai in violation of section 13(1)(C) read with section 13(3); secondly, scholarship payment to Mrs. Aarti Rai in violation

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

35. We have heard the rival submissions and also perused the relevant findings given in the impugned orders as well as material referred to before us. The main issues involved are; firstly, remuneration paid to Mrs. Malavika Rai in violation of section 13(1)(C) read with section 13(3); secondly, scholarship payment to Mrs. Aarti Rai in violation

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

35. We have heard the rival submissions and also perused the relevant findings given in the impugned orders as well as material referred to before us. The main issues involved are; firstly, remuneration paid to Mrs. Malavika Rai in violation of section 13(1)(C) read with section 13(3); secondly, scholarship payment to Mrs. Aarti Rai in violation