SUNSHINE EDUCATIONAL & DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. ADDL. CIT, EXEMPTION, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

5. Ld. CIT (A) also discussed the provisions of Section 10(23C)(iv) & (v) and observed that, once the income of Educational institution are exempted u/s.10(23C), then legislature does not intend to give same benefit in Sections 11 & 12 again. According to him there is no conflict and 11 ITA No.4727/Del./2017 overlapping between the provision contained in Sections

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

5. Ld. CIT (A) also discussed the provisions of Section 10(23C)(iv) & (v) and observed that, once the income of Educational institution are exempted u/s.10(23C), then legislature does not intend to give same benefit in Sections 11 & 12 again. According to him there is no conflict and overlapping between the provision contained in Sections 11

PRABHU SARAN GARG CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 3558/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year 2010-11 Prabhu Saran Garg Charitable Vs. Jcit, Trust, C/O M/S O.P. Sapra & Range-2, Associates, C-763, New Friends Ghaziabad Colony, New Delhi-110025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatp9634M Assessee By : Sh. Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Girish Kumar Kohali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.08.2022

disallowing exemption claimed. 2. That, learned commissioner of income tax (Appeals) manifestly erred in rejecting the contention that alleged advances made to three 2 Prabhu Saran Garg Charitable Trust unrelated parties are not ‘investment or deposit’ so as to hit by provisions of S. 13(1)(d) of Act as per the settled law. 3. That, learned commissioner of income

ACIT, MEERUT vs. M/S. SPACE AGE RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST, MEERUT

In the result Ground No. 1 and 3 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed and ground No

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Space Age Research & Vs. Circle-2, Meerut Technology Foundation, Charitable Trust, Railway Road, Meerut Pan: Aabts7321M (Appellant) (Respondent)

5 of 34 “In view of above assessee has contravened of provision of section 13 of I.T. Act, hence, it is not eligible for benefit of provision of section 11 , Assessee trust for the purpose of assessment is treated as an AOP and provision of AOP shall apply accordingly. Further interest paid to unsecured loan is disallowed

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)

5. Section 11 was inserted in the Income Tax Act 1961 providing for an exemption in respect of income from property held under trust wholly for charitable and religious purposes. 'Charitable purposes’ is defined in terms of section 2(15) of the Act to mean relief of the poor, education, medical relief and the advancement of any other object

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. AIPECCS SOCIETY

11(5) of the Act and in schemes, which were speculative in nature; and that the Assessee had advanced funds to its office bearers. 77. According to the Assessee, none of the aforesaid reasons would warrant denial of benefit under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. In addition, it was also urged that the scope of examination

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

5, disallowed this claim on the following I. grounds: 1. No statutory' head for "reimbursement": The AO noted that the Income-tax Act does not contain a specific section allowing deduction of "reimbursement of expenses." Any expenditure must fall within Section 37 (business expenses) or another statutory head. 2. Vague apportionment: The MOU states JVC shall receive "mutually agreed fees

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

5, disallowed this claim on the following I. grounds: 1. No statutory' head for "reimbursement": The AO noted that the Income-tax Act does not contain a specific section allowing deduction of "reimbursement of expenses." Any expenditure must fall within Section 37 (business expenses) or another statutory head. 2. Vague apportionment: The MOU states JVC shall receive "mutually agreed fees

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S SAHARA INDIA MASS COMMUNICATION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

5, disallowed this claim on the following I. grounds: 1. No statutory' head for "reimbursement": The AO noted that the Income-tax Act does not contain a specific section allowing deduction of "reimbursement of expenses." Any expenditure must fall within Section 37 (business expenses) or another statutory head. 2. Vague apportionment: The MOU states JVC shall receive "mutually agreed fees

FOUNDATION FOR UNIVERSAL RESPONSIBILITY OF HIS HOLINESS THE DALAI LAMA,DELHI vs. ITO, EXEMP. WARD-1(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1798/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2023-24 बनाम Foundation For Universal Income Tax Officer Responsibility Of His Holiness The Vs. (Exemption), Dalai Lama, Ward 1(1), Core-4A, Ugf, India, New Delhi. Habitat Centre, Upper Ground Floor, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. Pan No.Aaatf0174E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

5 year period ends on 31.03.2022 and therefore the unutilized amount could have been brought to tax in assessment year 2022-23 and not in assessment year 2023-24. In the light of the above discussion, we set aside the order of the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A) on this issue and direct the Assessing Officer/CPC to delete the adjustment

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)

11. "6. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in disallowing under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, sum of Rs. 5

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowed and entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied. Section 13 spells out certain circumstances in which the exemption provided under section 11/ 12 is not applicable. Further, Section 164(2) and 164(3) which reads as under:- “[(2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes

IILM FOUNDAION,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowed and entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied. Section 13 spells out certain circumstances in which the exemption provided under section 11/ 12 is not applicable. Further, Section 164(2) and 164(3) which reads as under:- “[(2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes

ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowed and entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied. Section 13 spells out certain circumstances in which the exemption provided under section 11/ 12 is not applicable. Further, Section 164(2) and 164(3) which reads as under:- “[(2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowed and entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied. Section 13 spells out certain circumstances in which the exemption provided under section 11/ 12 is not applicable. Further, Section 164(2) and 164(3) which reads as under:- “[(2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes

ADIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. IILM FOUNDATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

disallowed and entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied. Section 13 spells out certain circumstances in which the exemption provided under section 11/ 12 is not applicable. Further, Section 164(2) and 164(3) which reads as under:- “[(2) In the case of relevant income which is derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes

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)

Section 11(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 made w.e.f. from 01.04.2015 is retrospective in nature and not prospective. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) erred in making a disallowance

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)

Section 11(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 made w.e.f. from 01.04.2015 is retrospective in nature and not prospective. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) erred in making a disallowance