PATANJALI YOGPEETH (NYAS),DELHI vs. ADIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

ix) Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust Vs. DIT (Exemption) (2008) 171 Taxman 134 (Del.); (x) DIT (E) Vs. Charanjiv Charitable Trust (2014) 43 Taxman.com 300 (Del.); (xi) Mundakapadam Mandirams Society Vs. CIT (2002) 125 Taxman 515 (Ker.); (xii) Kamma Sangham Vs. DIT (E) (2014) 43 Taxman.com 192 (AP); (xiii) Shri Dhakad Samaj Dharamshala Bhawan Trust

JUST BE FOUNDATION TRUST ,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshram/S Just Be Foundation Commissioner Of Income Trust Flat No. 01, Yamuna Vs Tax (Exemptions), E-2, Apartments, Alaknanda, Civic Centre, New Delhi New Delhi-110019

section 80G. vii. The certificate cannot be used as a basis for claiming non deduction of tax at source in respect of investments etc., relating to the Trust/Institution. viii. All the Public Money so received including for Corpus or any contribution shall be routed through a Bank Account and such Bank Account Number shall be communicated to this office. ix

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

80G of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide F.No. CIT- II/CHD/809/Tech 187/471 dated 07.05.2007. 12 Gian Sagar Educational & Charitable Trust 2. During the course of enquiry conducted by DDIT(Inv.), Patiala in the case of M/s PACL group of cases on 22.03.2010, it was brought on record that CBI had arrested Sh. Kamaljit Sing, CEO of M/s Gian Sagar Medical College

VAIDYA MANGAT RAI FOUNDATION,CHANDIGARH vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharmavaidya Mangat Rai The Commissioner Of Foundation Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Friends Colony Chandigarh Gali No.2, Hansi Road Bhiwani. Pan-Aadtv 6078Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Adv. Department By Ms. Sapna Bhattia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 25/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/04/2024

80G. (1) In computing the total income of an assessee, there shall be deducted, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section,— (i) … (ii) ….. (2) The sums referred to in sub-section (1) shall be the following, namely :— (a) …….. (b) ………….. (c) ………………… (d)…………. (4) ………………………. (5) This section applies to donations to any institution or fund referred

MODEL VILLAGE TRUST,DELHI vs. SH. PRAKASH DUBEY CIT EXEMPTION, DELHI , DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos. 3189 & 3190/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:- बनाम Model Village Trust, Sh. Prakash Dubey, E-89, 4Th Floor, Flat No.402, Vs. Cit Exemption, Abul Fazal Enclave, Part-1, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aagtm6481K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

80G assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to paper book filed before us which is running into pages 1 to 1351 submitted that all the necessary details were filed before the Ld. CIT(E) to prove the genuineness of the objects and activities of the assessee. Ld. Counsel submits that at the stage of granting registration

MODEL VILLAGE TRUST ,DELHI vs. SH. PRAKASH DUBEY CIT EXEMPTION, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos. 3189 & 3190/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:- बनाम Model Village Trust, Sh. Prakash Dubey, E-89, 4Th Floor, Flat No.402, Vs. Cit Exemption, Abul Fazal Enclave, Part-1, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aagtm6481K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

80G assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to paper book filed before us which is running into pages 1 to 1351 submitted that all the necessary details were filed before the Ld. CIT(E) to prove the genuineness of the objects and activities of the assessee. Ld. Counsel submits that at the stage of granting registration

TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. ACME EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY

Appeal is dismissed but with no order as to costs

ix) deposits with or investment in any bonds issued by a public company formed and registered in India with the main object of carrying on the business of providing long- term finance for construction or purchase of houses in India for residential purposes and which is [eligible for deduction under] clause (viii) of sub-section (1) of section

NIIT FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyniit Foundation, Vs. Cit(E), Plot No. 8, Balaji Estate, New Delhi Sudarshan Munjal Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi Pan: Aacan3951E (Appellant) (Respondent)

charitable in nature and within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 5. During assessment proceedings ld. AO enquired about the object, activity, receipt of fees, TDS its reconciliation with form no 26AS, service tax payments and its nature, details of donors/ contributors etc. There was huge communication by the assessee, which we will come

M/S SOCIETY FOR PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH IN ASIA,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Society For Participatory Research In Vs. Income Tax Officer(E), Trust Ward-Iii, Asia, 42,Tughlakabad Instutional Area, New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aaats1994H (Appellant) (Respondent)

5 We have considered the rival submissions, perused the material on record and orders of the authorities below. Section 2(15) of the Act is amended by the Finance Act, 2009 reads as under: "2. Definitions.-In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires— (15) "charitable purpose" includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief, Preservation of environment (including watersheds

DDIT (E), DELHI vs. PETROTECH, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiddit(E), Vs. Petrotech, Inv. Cir-Ii, Room No. 306, Aayakar 601/603, Tolstoy House, Tolstoy Bhawan, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi Pan:Aaaap0965E (Appellant) (Respondent )

80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟) by theCIT vide order dated 02.10.2010 and 16.01.2009, respectively which are applicable for the year under consideration ( refer pages 28-29 of paperbook).  On the basis of the aforesaid, the assessee filed for the year under consideration,the return declaring Nilincome after claiming exemption under sections 11/12

SOCIETY FOR PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH IN ASIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

5 general public utility’ i.e., the fourth limb of the definition of ‘charitable purpose’ contained in section 2(15). Hence, such entities will not be eligible for exemption under section 11 or under section 10(23C) of the Act if they carry on commercial activities. Whether such an entity is carrying on an activity in the nature of trade, commerce

NATIONAL SOLAR ENERGY FEDERATION OF INDIA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD EXEMP 2(4), DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

80G of the Act which has duly been allowed. According to the Revenue, the Annual membership fee is not a voluntary donation but is charged in lieu of services received/receivable from the organization upon 4 entering into the membership by consenting to the terms and conditions of the organization. Further, according to the Revenue activities of the registered public charitable

SHREE DEWAN SHIKSHA SAMITI,JIND vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: us. Considering the fact that the assessee has been continuously absent, we find it appropriate to hear the Ld. Departmental Representative and decide the Appeal on verifying the material available on record.

charitable activities. On the contrary, the trust has been having continuous surplus and is engaged in creation of fixed assets. 4.3 The society was asked a specific query regarding the details of the cash deposits made in the bank accounts of the society during demonetization period along with substantiating documentary evidence. In response, the applicant submitted that "Reply regarding

GANDHI COLLEGE OF PHARMACY,KARNAL vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. C. M. Garg, Jm Ita No. 3476/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Gandhi College Of Pharmacy, Vs Acit, Near Iti Chowk, G. T. Road, Circle, Karnal Karnal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg5629D Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Ashish Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.03.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A), Karnal. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Is Bad Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts. 2(I) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Action Of A.O. In Holding That The Assesses Is Not Eligible For Exemption Under Section 10(23C)(Iiiad) Of The Act.

ix) CIT Vs. Vidya Vikas Vihar (2004) 265 ITR 489 (Bom) x) Gujarat State Co.Op. Union Vs. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 279 (Guj.) f) That under the Act, the institution claiming exemption of income under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act was required to file their return mandatorily w.e.f. A.Y. 2006-07. In the case of assessee neither

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. HAMDARD NATION FOUNDATION (INDIA), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

80G(5)(vi) of the Act. The assessee filed its return of income on 31.10.2007 declaring nil income, which was processed u/s. 143(1) and was later on selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. During the scrutiny proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that in the income and expenditure account, following incomes were credited

MAHARAJI EDUCATIONAL TRUST vs. DIT(E),

In the result this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2004-05 Ay: 2005-06 Ay: 2006-07 Ay: 2007-08 Ito (E), Trust Ward Iv Vs. Maharaji Education Trust New Delhi No.1, Santosh Nagar Pratap Vihar Ghaziabad 201 009 A.Y. : ------ Maharaji Educational Trust Vs. Dit(E), N.Delhi Ghaziabad

80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Subsequently, the assessee Trust has also been allowed exemption u/s 10(23)(C)(vi) of the Act by DG (Exemptions), New Delhi vide order dt. 27.3.2009 vide F.No.DGIT(E)/10(23)(C)(vi)/2008- 09/1766. 2.1. The registration u/s 12A of the Act continues and has not been withdrawn till date

ITO (E) TRUST WARD-IV vs. MAHARAJI EDUCATION TRUST,

In the result this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2004-05 Ay: 2005-06 Ay: 2006-07 Ay: 2007-08 Ito (E), Trust Ward Iv Vs. Maharaji Education Trust New Delhi No.1, Santosh Nagar Pratap Vihar Ghaziabad 201 009 A.Y. : ------ Maharaji Educational Trust Vs. Dit(E), N.Delhi Ghaziabad

80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Subsequently, the assessee Trust has also been allowed exemption u/s 10(23)(C)(vi) of the Act by DG (Exemptions), New Delhi vide order dt. 27.3.2009 vide F.No.DGIT(E)/10(23)(C)(vi)/2008- 09/1766. 2.1. The registration u/s 12A of the Act continues and has not been withdrawn till date

ACIT, MEERUT vs. M/S. KASTOORI DEVI FOUNDATION, MEERUT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

IX. CIT Vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Cal.) 208 ITR 465 X. V.I.S.P Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (MP) 265 ITR 202 XI. Further, the case law of DIT (Exemption) Vs. Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation (2005) 146 Taxman 569 (Delhi) quoted in CIT (A) order pertained to even prior to insertion of sec.ll5BBC