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

12A of the Act on 28.05.1976. In respect of the assessment year 2006-07, it filed a return of income declaring Rs.Nil as its income. On 31.10.2006 this return was processed under Section 143(1). Subsequently a scrutiny of the return was initiated and notices under Sections 142(1) and 143(2) were issued. A sum of Rs.8

SATISH DEV JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation based on material found in the course of search conducted by the Department in the case of some other person. This judgment also supports the contention of the assessee that no addition could be made in the assessments framed under section 153A of the Act, based on materials found and seized from some other person, unless provisions of section

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation based on material found in the course of search conducted by the Department in the case of some other person. This judgment also supports the contention of the assessee that no addition could be made in the assessments framed under section 153A of the Act, based on materials found and seized from some other person, unless provisions of section

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation based on material found in the course of search conducted by the Department in the case of some other person. This judgment also supports the contention of the assessee that no addition could be made in the assessments framed under section 153A of the Act, based on materials found and seized from some other person, unless provisions of section

ANAND JAIN HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation based on material found in the course of search conducted by the Department in the case of some other person. This judgment also supports the contention of the assessee that no addition could be made in the assessments framed under section 153A of the Act, based on materials found and seized from some other person, unless provisions of section

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation based on material found in the course of search conducted by the Department in the case of some other person. This judgment also supports the contention of the assessee that no addition could be made in the assessments framed under section 153A of the Act, based on materials found and seized from some other person, unless provisions of section

ANAND JAIN HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation based on material found in the course of search conducted by the Department in the case of some other person. This judgment also supports the contention of the assessee that no addition could be made in the assessments framed under section 153A of the Act, based on materials found and seized from some other person, unless provisions of section

SAJAN KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

depreciation based on material found in the course of search conducted by the Department in the case of some other person. This judgment also supports the contention of the assessee that no addition could be made in the assessments framed under section 153A of the Act, based on materials found and seized from some other person, unless provisions of section

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. AIPECCS SOCIETY

depreciation. 7. Aggrieved by the order dated 29th November, 2001 passed by the CIT(A), the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal, which too was dismissed by an order dated 25th June, 2004. The Tribunal upheld the AO’s finding that the Assessee was not functioning solely for the purposes of education and, therefore, was not eligible for exemption

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)-EXEMPTION, NEW DELHI vs. HAMDARD LABORATORIES (INDIA) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that assessee has offered substantial concession in rent to person specified u/s 13(3), which is a clear violation of Section 13(2)(b) of the Act, 1961 and hence assessee

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

12A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and is also approved under section 10(23)(vi) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In this case, during the course of TDS survey under section 133A(2A) of the I.T. Act, 1961, it was noticed by the A.O. that the assessee has not deducted tax from payments remitted abroad under various heads i.e., Commission

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

12A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and is also approved under section 10(23)(vi) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In this case, during the course of TDS survey under section 133A(2A) of the I.T. Act, 1961, it was noticed by the A.O. that the assessee has not deducted tax from payments remitted abroad under various heads i.e., Commission

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

12A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and is also approved under section 10(23)(vi) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In this case, during the course of TDS survey under section 133A(2A) of the I.T. Act, 1961, it was noticed by the A.O. that the assessee has not deducted tax from payments remitted abroad under various heads i.e., Commission

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

12A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and is also approved under section 10(23)(vi) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In this case, during the course of TDS survey under section 133A(2A) of the I.T. Act, 1961, it was noticed by the A.O. that the assessee has not deducted tax from payments remitted abroad under various heads i.e., Commission

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

12A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and is also approved under section 10(23)(vi) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In this case, during the course of TDS survey under section 133A(2A) of the I.T. Act, 1961, it was noticed by the A.O. that the assessee has not deducted tax from payments remitted abroad under various heads i.e., Commission

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

12A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and is also approved under section 10(23)(vi) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In this case, during the course of TDS survey under section 133A(2A) of the I.T. Act, 1961, it was noticed by the A.O. that the assessee has not deducted tax from payments remitted abroad under various heads i.e., Commission

SHARDA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,GREATER NOIDA vs. ITO (TDS), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NOIDA

In the result, ITA.No.3377/Del

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Anubhav Sharma

12A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and is also approved under section 10(23)(vi) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In this case, during the course of TDS survey under section 133A(2A) of the I.T. Act, 1961, it was noticed by the A.O. that the assessee has not deducted tax from payments remitted abroad under various heads i.e., Commission

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

B-11, Qutab Bhawan, Dr. Shyama Prasad Institutional Area, New Delhi Mukherjee Civic Centre, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, New Delhi PAN :AAAAI0016R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Praveen Kumar, Sr.DR Respondent by Shri Ajay Baheti, CA Date of hearing 15.01.2019 Date of pronouncement 25.01.2019 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: These two appeals by the Revenue are directed against two separate