RAM SARAN DAS KISHORI LAL CHARITABLE TRUST,DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: -------] Ram Saran Das Kishori Lal Commissioner Of Income Tax Charitable Trust, (Exemption), Room No.24.05, E-2 Block, 24Th Floor, Civic Centre, A-27, Friends Colony East, Vs New Delhi-110001 New Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaatr0783P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv. Shri Arpit Goyal, Adv. Respondent By Shri Amit Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 09.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.11.2025

4), ld counsel submitted that Board Resolution dated 04.09.2004 was passed by the Board of Trustees of the Appellant resolving that due to loss in running of the hospital for last one year or more, it is unanimously decided that the hospital may either be closed or sold on outright basis or leased out to anyone who may be interested

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

4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in holding that education in consideration of any fee is not charity and thus the receipt of fee is independent activity liable to tax under SECTION 56 "INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES without any deduction of expenses incurred for carrying out the same activity. 5. That the order

MRS. SASHI SADH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 Mrs. Sashi Sadh, 52/12, C.R. Park, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-23(2), New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan : Amlps4154L (Appellant) (Respondent)

11 AY: 2010-11 of section 10B(1)read with section 10B(4) of the Act. Accordingly, the appellant succeeds at its ground of appeal." 17. From vigilant perusal and careful consideration of the ratio of decision of ITAT Special Bench, Indore we observe that the Special Bench after considering the ratio of decision in the case of Liberty India

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

4. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in enhancing the assessment and bringing to tax the gross receipts as taxable income of the appellant and that too without giving any deduction and denying the benefit of section 11 & 12 is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances

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

4. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in enhancing the assessment and bringing to tax the gross receipts as taxable income of the appellant and that too without giving any deduction and denying the benefit of section 11 & 12 is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances

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

4. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in enhancing the assessment and bringing to tax the gross receipts as taxable income of the appellant and that too without giving any deduction and denying the benefit of section 11 & 12 is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances

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)

4. The various sub-sections of section 11 stipulate the methodology for computing the income applied to charitable and religious purposes and the 15% that may be accumulated or set apart. The section also envisages the inclusion of a business undertaking in the property held under trust and the determination of income therefrom. Sub Section 5 sets out the acceptable

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

4. 4.1. The ld. AO disallowed the commission expense of Rs.41,55,067l- on the ground that assessee failed to discharge the burden of proving that the commission was paid to genuine person. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). xxx 8. We have heard the rival submission in the light

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

4. 4.1. The ld. AO disallowed the commission expense of Rs.41,55,067l- on the ground that assessee failed to discharge the burden of proving that the commission was paid to genuine person. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). xxx 8. We have heard the rival submission in the light

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -05 , DELHI

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

4. 4.1. The ld. AO disallowed the commission expense of Rs.41,55,067l- on the ground that assessee failed to discharge the burden of proving that the commission was paid to genuine person. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). xxx 8. We have heard the rival submission in the light

M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee with respect to ground No

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishibharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent) Bharti Airtel Ltd, Addl Cit, Bharti Crescent, 1, Vs. Range-2, Cr Building, Ip Nelson Mandela Road, Vaxant Estate, New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi Pan:Aaacb2894G (Appellant) (Respondent)

4,2 014 is not applicable to A.YITA No. 880/Del/2014 2009-10. But in view of proposition rendered by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, it is settled that the proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act being declaratory and curative is applicable from 1.4.2005 which is (lie date of insertion of sub-section (ia) of section

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)

disallowance of entire Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted w.e.f 01.04.2015. 4

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)

disallowance of entire Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted w.e.f 01.04.2015. 4

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)

disallowance of entire Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted w.e.f 01.04.2015. 4

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)

disallowance of entire Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted w.e.f 01.04.2015. 4

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)

disallowance of entire Depreciation of Rs. 6,84,73,391/- without any basis treating it as double deduction in view of section 11(6) of the IT Act, 1961 inserted w.e.f 01.04.2015. 4

M/S PARNIKA COMMERCIAL & ESTATES (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri C.M. Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

disallowed the claim of deduction of Rs.2,47,75,170/- and added the same back to the assessee’s total income. 3. The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) examining in detail the facts and submissions of the appellant, found that the appellant is not eligible for claiming deduction u/s. 80IA(4

ACIT,, NEW DELHI vs. M/S VATIKA LIMITED,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed, the COs of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

4. The Assessing Officer has given the finding that assessee has incurred liability of interest expenditure proceeded to invoke Section 69C to make addition. 5. Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the entire addition for NH-8 deal for A.Y. 2011-12 without any evidence. 6. For unabated assessment, no addition can be made u/s 153A in absence