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.

11 (5) of the Income Tax Act 1961. The assessee-society claimed investment in 87.48% but the A.O. calculated at 76.53%. The AO has not allowed the depreciation as per several reported decisions. The AO has allowed depreciation in preceding A.Y. 2006-2007 under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Further, surplus up-to 15% permissible under section

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)

depreciation to the assessee, applied the provisions of sub section 6 of section 11 reading as follows; '(6) In this

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

The appeal is disposed of

6. Insofar as the Assessee’s claim for depreciation was concerned, the Tribunal held that deprecation on assets, used for providing relief through Ayurvedic system of medicine or used in education and research relating to Ayurvedic system of medicine, was allowable notwithstanding that the expenditure on purchase of the assets was exempted under 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)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of 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)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of 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)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of 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)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of 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)

Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11

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

SECTION 56 "INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES without any deduction of expenses incurred for carrying out the same activity. 5. That the order of Ld. CIT(A) is perverse being self contradictory as well as contrary to the Act and registration granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) u/s 12AA read with S.2(15). 6. That the order

RAMA DEVI MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, NOIDA

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

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2010-11

6. Whether Ld. CIT(A) is correct In law to hold that educational trusts or institutions cannot collect fee etc from students and charging of such fee etc. will render the objects of the trusts/institutions as uncharitable. 7. Whether Ld. CIT(A) is justified in law to ignore the principle of application Of income u/s 11 (1)(a) for claim

G D EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. JCIT, RANGE- 1, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

section 11 & 12 is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in computing the income of assessee in the status of ‘AOP’ instead of ‘charitable

G D EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. JCIT, RANGE- 1, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

section 11 & 12 is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in computing the income of assessee in the status of ‘AOP’ instead of ‘charitable

G D EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. JCIT, RANGE- 1, NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

section 11 & 12 is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in computing the income of assessee in the status of ‘AOP’ instead of ‘charitable

RICHMOND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

section 10 of the Act that where a reference,\nunder the first proviso to sub-section (3) of section 143, has been made on or before\nthe 31st March, 2022 by the Assessing Officer for the contravention of certain\nprovisions of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Act, such references shall be dealt with\nin the manner provided under

PHD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX - EXEMPTIONS

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

section 11(4A) stands satisfied, the assessee will be entitled to other deductions u/s 11, otherM'ise not. As mentioned earlier, these I facts could not be ascertained by the AO due to paucity of time. Therefore, the matter is restored to the file of the AO to ascertain facts in this matter, hear the assessee and pass a fresh

PHD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY vs. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX -EXEMPTIONS

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

section 11(4A) stands satisfied, the assessee will be entitled to other deductions u/s 11, otherM'ise not. As mentioned earlier, these I facts could not be ascertained by the AO due to paucity of time. Therefore, the matter is restored to the file of the AO to ascertain facts in this matter, hear the assessee and pass a fresh

ITO (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INSTITUTE OF MARKETING & MANAGEMENT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

6 & Para 7 of On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. the ITAT Order CIT(A) has erred in directing the AO to allow benefits of Section 11 & 12 of the I.T. Act, ignoring the fact the assessee was involved in business activity within the meaning of section

ITO (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INSTITUTE OF MARKETING & MANAGEMENT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal for the assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

6 & Para 7 of On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. the ITAT Order CIT(A) has erred in directing the AO to allow benefits of Section 11 & 12 of the I.T. Act, ignoring the fact the assessee was involved in business activity within the meaning of section

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

11 and for the same reasons. He also added an amount of Rs.25 lakhs claimed to have been received by the assessee from M/s. Kuber Swamy Ashutosh Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. and Rs.9,06,000/- from M/s. Sun System Institute of Information Technology as corpus donations, disbelieving the assessee’s version and invoking Section 68 of the Act. He also took