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 in India in accordance with Section 11(1)(a) the provision for doubtful debts must be deducted. Accordingly, we frame the following substantial question of law and answer the same in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue: - “”Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provision for doubtful debts must

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 in India in accordance with Section 11(1)(a) the provision for doubtful debts must be deducted. Accordingly, we frame the following substantial question of law and answer the same in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue: - “”Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provision for doubtful debts must

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

37,00,000/- on behalf of the Trust (SIMS), Hapur and all the amount was returned back to the trust during Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively’. The copy of Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT the letter written by the CA of the Sh. V. Mathiyalgan dated 15/12/2018 is reproduced as under:- 41. The Department while

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

37,00,000/- on behalf of the Trust (SIMS), Hapur and all the amount was returned back to the trust during Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively’. The copy of Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT the letter written by the CA of the Sh. V. Mathiyalgan dated 15/12/2018 is reproduced as under:- 41. The Department while

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

37,00,000/- on behalf of the Trust (SIMS), Hapur and all the amount was returned back to the trust during Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively’. The copy of Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT the letter written by the CA of the Sh. V. Mathiyalgan dated 15/12/2018 is reproduced as under:- 41. The Department while

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

37,00,000/- on behalf of the Trust (SIMS), Hapur and all the amount was returned back to the trust during Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively’. The copy of Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT the letter written by the CA of the Sh. V. Mathiyalgan dated 15/12/2018 is reproduced as under:- 41. The Department while

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

37,00,000/- on behalf of the Trust (SIMS), Hapur and all the amount was returned back to the trust during Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively’. The copy of Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT the letter written by the CA of the Sh. V. Mathiyalgan dated 15/12/2018 is reproduced as under:- 41. The Department while

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

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

37,00,000/- on behalf of the Trust (SIMS), Hapur and all the amount was returned back to the trust during Assessment Year 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively’. The copy of Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT the letter written by the CA of the Sh. V. Mathiyalgan dated 15/12/2018 is reproduced as under:- 41. The Department while

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

37. We observe that, the ld. PCIT has revoked the approval u/s 12AA(3) holding that the assessee trust was engaged in the nefarious activities for inducting of fresh batch of students for the academic session without the requisite infrastructure. It was held that it is a clear violation of (ii) of para 4 of the trust deed, simultaneously, violating

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

1)(c)(ii) read with Section 13(2) and Section 13(3) of the Act. 2014:DHC:1467-DB ITA Nos.321/2013, 322/2013 & 323/2013 Page 34 of 40 29. It is now necessary to examine the other two questions of law. We may take up the applicability of Section 68 in respect of the donations received from Jagjit Singh and Piyush

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

The appeal is disposed of

37. Although the above observations were made in the context of interpretation of the Object Clause of a Memorandum of Association of a Company, the principle would also be applicable to determine whether any activity is ultra vires the purpose of a Trust. 38. Thus, in our view, the AO and the Tribunal erred in concluding that the Assessee

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

37 the entire exemption cannot be forfeited. This decision of the coordinate bench has also been affirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. Further, Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot

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

37 the entire exemption cannot be forfeited. This decision of the coordinate bench has also been affirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. Further, Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot

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

37 the entire exemption cannot be forfeited. This decision of the coordinate bench has also been affirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. Further, Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot

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

37 the entire exemption cannot be forfeited. This decision of the coordinate bench has also been affirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. Further, Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot

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

37 the entire exemption cannot be forfeited. This decision of the coordinate bench has also been affirmed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. Further, Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. FR. Mullers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot