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

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

5,04,30,717 pertaining to units other than those claiming deduction under section 1OA of the Act despite the fact that the said business loss is mentioned in the computation of income in the assessment order. 17. The Ld. AO has erred in not allowing deduction under section 80G of the Act amounting

EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

5,04,30,717 pertaining to units other than those claiming deduction under section 1OA of the Act despite the fact that the said business loss is mentioned in the computation of income in the assessment order. 17. The Ld. AO has erred in not allowing deduction under section 80G of the Act amounting

ACIT(E),CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI vs. DIVYA JYOTI JAGRATI SANSTHAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla

5)(vi) and as per the provision or section 80G(5B) read with explanation 3 to section 80G, an institution existing wholly or substantially for religious purpose is not allowed to get the benefit of sec. 80G. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs.18,36,05,498/- u/s 115BBC

HONDA MOTORCYCLE AND SCOOTER INDIA PVT. LTD. ,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), GURUGRAM

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

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member)

depreciation on the carrying value of the Signage expenditure which was capitalised by the AO during the previous assessment proceedings for A Y 2012-13 to 2015-16. Re: Sales tools Expenses -INR 1,34,45,919/- 11. That the AO/DRP grossly erred in disallowing an amount of INR 1,34,45,919/- being sales tools expenses under section

JINDAL STEEL POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, HISAR

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

Bench: Sh. C.M. Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

depreciation is being claimed must be directly used for manufacturing purposes. 25. The learned AR thus contended that the impugned order passed by the CIT under section 263 was without jurisdiction and bad in law and additions/disallowances made in the consequential order u/s 143(3)/263 of the Act are illegal, unsustainable and call for being deleted. It was also

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, HISAR

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

Bench: Sh. C.M. Garg & Sh. O.P. Kant

depreciation is being claimed must be directly used for manufacturing purposes. 25. The learned AR thus contended that the impugned order passed by the CIT under section 263 was without jurisdiction and bad in law and additions/disallowances made in the consequential order u/s 143(3)/263 of the Act are illegal, unsustainable and call for being deleted. It was also

D.E. SHAW INDIA ADVISORY SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed in terms of our specific observations and

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2010-11 Ay: 2011-12 Ay: 2012-13 D.E. Shaw India Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, E-20, 1St & 2Nd Floor, Circle 7(1), Main Market, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. New Delhi-110016 (Pan: Aabce6097P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Kapil Hirani, Ca Shri Suresh Tolani, Adv. Shri Darpan Kirpalani Respondent By : Shri T.M. Shivakumar, Cit ( Dr)

80G of the Act. 6. That the learned AO/ Hon'ble DRP have erred, on the facts and in law, on the circumstances of the case and in law by alleging that the Appellant has furnished inaccurate particulars of income, thereby proposing to initiate penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the learned AO have erred

D.E. SHAW INDIA ADVISORY SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed in terms of our specific observations and

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2010-11 Ay: 2011-12 Ay: 2012-13 D.E. Shaw India Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, E-20, 1St & 2Nd Floor, Circle 7(1), Main Market, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. New Delhi-110016 (Pan: Aabce6097P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Kapil Hirani, Ca Shri Suresh Tolani, Adv. Shri Darpan Kirpalani Respondent By : Shri T.M. Shivakumar, Cit ( Dr)

80G of the Act. 6. That the learned AO/ Hon'ble DRP have erred, on the facts and in law, on the circumstances of the case and in law by alleging that the Appellant has furnished inaccurate particulars of income, thereby proposing to initiate penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the learned AO have erred

M/S D.E. SHAW INDIA ADVISORY SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed in terms of our specific observations and

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2010-11 Ay: 2011-12 Ay: 2012-13 D.E. Shaw India Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, E-20, 1St & 2Nd Floor, Circle 7(1), Main Market, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. New Delhi-110016 (Pan: Aabce6097P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Kapil Hirani, Ca Shri Suresh Tolani, Adv. Shri Darpan Kirpalani Respondent By : Shri T.M. Shivakumar, Cit ( Dr)

80G of the Act. 6. That the learned AO/ Hon'ble DRP have erred, on the facts and in law, on the circumstances of the case and in law by alleging that the Appellant has furnished inaccurate particulars of income, thereby proposing to initiate penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the learned AO have erred

ACIT(E)- CIRCLE- 1(1), NEW DELHI vs. INDIA HABITAT CENTRE , NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of Revenue dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

80G(5)(vi) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 vide Order Dated 19.07.2011. The A.O. reproduced the primary aims and objects of the assessee-society in the assessment Order and found that after declaring total income and deducting the expenditure, assessee has net balance of Rs.4,61,08,034/-. The assessee submitted before the A.O. that its income is covered

AT & T GLOBAL NETWORK SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LTD. ,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

80G of the Act for donation to Swachh Bharat Kosh and Clean Ganga Fund only. 5 SA No. 425/Del/2024 AT&T Global Network Services India Pvt. Ltd. 7. Allowability of road tax and value added tax on assets taken on lease 7.1. On the facts, in circumstances of the case and in law, the road

ITO(E), WARD-1(4), NEW DELHI vs. MEHTA CHARITABLE PRAJANALAYA TRUST (REGD)), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

5 Mehta Charitable Prajanalaya Trust to be allowed as deduction u/s 80G in case donations paid are to entities which are approved for the purpose of section 80G. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer is directed to- i. assess the income of the assessee with respect to activities categorized as charitable activities in the assessment order as income from other sources after

DCIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. GOODEARTH FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the grounds of appeal Nos

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit(E), Vs. Goodearth Foundation, Circle-1(1), Eicher House, Civic Centre, 12, Commercial Complex, New Delhi. Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi. Pan: Aaatg5663R

80G vide order dated 15th July, 2009. The society was established with the object of setting up or acquiring and running an institution or institutions for education for the benefit of the public. It filed its return of income on 28th September, 2010 disclosing nil income. The Assessing Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings, observed that the assessee

MAX NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, LTU, NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimax New York Life Insurance Vs. Dcit, Company Ltd, Circle-1, Ltu, New Delhi Plot No. 90A, Sector-18, Udyog Vihar, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent)

80G of the Act. 4. The brief facts of the case shows that assessee is a joint venture between Max India Ltd and New York Life insurance International Holding Ltd. The assessee filed the return of income on 27.11.2014 declaring income of Rs. 4741955000/-. The assessment was made on 29.12.2016 determining the total income of Rs. 9536768000/-. The income

M/S. FRIENDS CHARITABLE SOCIETY,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri N.K Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

section 11 to 13 of the Act and learned Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) has also confirmed the view taken by Assessing officer. 4. That the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax ( Appeals) has also erred on facts and in law to confirm the disallowance made by 3 ITA No. 3298/Del/2015. M/s Friends Charitable Society. Assessing officer

SANSKRITI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

80G of the Act. It is also not in dispute that during the year under assessment, assessee trust earned income from school fee, bank interest and other miscellaneous income. Assessee claimed depreciation on assets of Rs. 2,34,01,317/- for AY 2011-12 and Rs. 2,22,52,237/- for AY 2012-13. 8. AO as well

SANSKRITI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

80G of the Act. It is also not in dispute that during the year under assessment, assessee trust earned income from school fee, bank interest and other miscellaneous income. Assessee claimed depreciation on assets of Rs. 2,34,01,317/- for AY 2011-12 and Rs. 2,22,52,237/- for AY 2012-13. 8. AO as well