ACIT, GURGAON vs. M/S. THE SCIENTIFIC & EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT SOCIETY, GURGAON

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri L.P. Sahu, A.M.

2) which is evident from the fact that it filed Form-10 along with its return of income, stating the object of accumulation which have been allowed by in A.Y. 2007-2008 by the Ld. CIT(A). It is, therefore, established that assessee-society has applied its income earned from capital gains, for charitable purpose under section 11

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

The appeal is disposed of

depreciation would not be available on such assets. 2015:DHC:5917-DB ITA 141/2013 Page 14 of 35 19. At the outset, it would be necessary to refer to clause (a) of sub Section (1) of Section 11 of the Act which reads as under:- “11. (1) Subject to the provisions of sections 60 to 63, the following income shall

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)

2(45) defining 'total income’, and computation of 'income’ in terms of section 11 of the Act. Referring to the scheme of section 11, he would contend that the provisions thereof constituted a complete code which took into account the application of depreciation

CONFRERE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

11. The learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the following additions which are impugned in this appeal: a. Rs. 19,40,343/- on account of surplus claimed as application of income b. Rs. 5,44,011/-on account of disallowing the claim of depreciation on fixed assets 12. That

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)

2½% and they also claimed depreciation on furniture @ 5%. The question which arose before the Court for determination was : whether depreciation could be denied to the assessee, as expenditure on acquisition of the assets had been treated as application of income in the year of acquisition? It was held by the Bombay High Court that section 11

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)

2½% and they also claimed depreciation on furniture @ 5%. The question which arose before the Court for determination was : whether depreciation could be denied to the assessee, as expenditure on acquisition of the assets had been treated as application of income in the year of acquisition? It was held by the Bombay High Court that section 11

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)

2½% and they also claimed depreciation on furniture @ 5%. The question which arose before the Court for determination was : whether depreciation could be denied to the assessee, as expenditure on acquisition of the assets had been treated as application of income in the year of acquisition? It was held by the Bombay High Court that section 11

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)

2½% and they also claimed depreciation on furniture @ 5%. The question which arose before the Court for determination was : whether depreciation could be denied to the assessee, as expenditure on acquisition of the assets had been treated as application of income in the year of acquisition? It was held by the Bombay High Court that section 11

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)

2½% and they also claimed depreciation on furniture @ 5%. The question which arose before the Court for determination was : whether depreciation could be denied to the assessee, as expenditure on acquisition of the assets had been treated as application of income in the year of acquisition? It was held by the Bombay High Court that section 11

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2006-07

11 (iii). It is not formed by the transfer to a new business of machinery of plant previously used for any purpose. Explanation.— The provisions of Explanation I and Explanation 2 sub-section 1 and Explanation 2 sub-section (2) of section 80-1 shall apply for the purposes of clause (iii) of this sub-section as they apply

INCOME TAX vs. LIMITED

The appeal is dismissed

depreciable assets forming part of “block of assets” notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2 (42A) to which sections 48 and 49 of the Act apply subject to the modifications contained in sub-section (1) (i) to (ii) of Section 50 of the Act. 14. A conjoint and a plain reading of the provision of Section 2 (11

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI IV vs. EASTMAN INDUSTRIES LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

depreciable assets forming part of “block of assets” notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2 (42A) to which sections 48 and 49 of the Act apply subject to the modifications contained in sub-section (1) (i) to (ii) of Section 50 of the Act. 14. A conjoint and a plain reading of the provision of Section 2 (11

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

Appeal is allowed

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

section 142(2A) while confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in denying exemption under sections 11/12 of the Act. 8.2 The ld. AR on queries raised by the Bench responded that assessee trust is not running shops or distribution of products and for those shoppings and distribution and selling of products, as on commercial basis different entity is there

DAYA NAND PUSHPA DEVI CHARITABLE TRUST,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadavassessment Year : 2010-11

2 or 3(A) of section 11 will not apply in relation to any income of a trust or an institute being profits and gains of business. It doesn't put a restriction that it is applicable to the fourth limbs i.e. object of any public utility. The concession granted in 11 (4A) is restricted to the business which

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

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2005-06 Ay: 2009-10

section 80IA. He submitted that ground nos. 1 and 1.1 of the Department’s appeal are also covered by the decision of the ITAT (supra). The ld. AR further submitted that ground no. 6 of the assessee’s appeal pertaining to disallowance of depreciation is also covered in assessee’s favour by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High

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

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2005-06 Ay: 2009-10

section 80IA. He submitted that ground nos. 1 and 1.1 of the Department’s appeal are also covered by the decision of the ITAT (supra). The ld. AR further submitted that ground no. 6 of the assessee’s appeal pertaining to disallowance of depreciation is also covered in assessee’s favour by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High

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

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2005-06 Ay: 2009-10

section 80IA. He submitted that ground nos. 1 and 1.1 of the Department’s appeal are also covered by the decision of the ITAT (supra). The ld. AR further submitted that ground no. 6 of the assessee’s appeal pertaining to disallowance of depreciation is also covered in assessee’s favour by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High

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

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2005-06 Ay: 2009-10

section 80IA. He submitted that ground nos. 1 and 1.1 of the Department’s appeal are also covered by the decision of the ITAT (supra). The ld. AR further submitted that ground no. 6 of the assessee’s appeal pertaining to disallowance of depreciation is also covered in assessee’s favour by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High

HERO FINCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 11(1), DELHI, C.R. BUILDING

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

section 250(6) of the Act. In the result, ground nos. 1 & 7 of the appeal is allowed and the ground\nnos. 2 to 6 of the appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.\n8.\nGround nos. 8 to 11 of the appeal are against the disallowance on depreciation