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

ac), the Appellant did not hold any valid registration under section 12A(a), the CIT(E) held that the Appellant erred in applying for registration under the said sub-clause and the registration was obtained by the Appellant from the CPC fraudulently. It was submitted that along with the application for registration, the Appellant enclosed note titled "Note

SHAKUNTLAM BAL VIKAS SOCIETY,DELHI vs. ITO WARD EXEMP 2(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2022-23

12A of sub section(i) of clause(ac) of sub clause(1) which was granted for the period A.Y. 2022-2023 to A.Y. 2026-27 and an approval under section 80G sub section (5) clause(i) was also granted. 2.1 The return of the assessee for A.Y. 2022-2023 was filed on 07/11/2022 and the assessee had claimed exemption under

Commissioner of Income Tax – I

disallowed the claim for deduction/exemption of Rs.12,17,41,860/- under Section 10B, as made in the return. He also made additions in alternative. Total 2015:DHC:1179-DB ITA 551/2013 & 553/2013 Page 4 of 30 income of the assessee on the basis of aforesaid addition and other additions was computed at Rs.10,86,14,708/-. 6. The assessee succeeded

SHREE BANKEY BIHARI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GHAZIABAD vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU, CPC, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions before him the same is reproduced below:

disallowed the claim of the assessee u/s 11 for the reason that the assessee has filed the return of income late and not filed Form-10B on time as per the provisions. 3. Aggrieved with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions before him the same is reproduced below: “5. Submissions

TRILOK SINGH BHANDARI CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD EXEMPTION 2(3), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman

AC), Delhi has erred both in law and on facts in upholding the determination of the income of the appellant trust at Rs.14,31,437/- as against declared Nil income In an intimation dated 9.3.2019 U/S 143(1) of the Act 2. That the order made by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by dismissing the appeal

TRILOK SINGH BHANDARI CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD EXEMPTION 2(3), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman

AC), Delhi has erred both in law and on facts in upholding the determination of the income of the appellant trust at Rs.14,31,437/- as against declared Nil income In an intimation dated 9.3.2019 U/S 143(1) of the Act 2. That the order made by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by dismissing the appeal

M/S ACTIVE SECURITIES LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

12A, 12AA and 12B are intended merely to indicate the classes of income : the heads do not exhaustively delimit sources from which income arises." It was also held that: "even if an item of income is earned in the course of carrying on a business, it will not necessarily fall within the head "profits and gains of business" within

ACIT E CIRCLE-1(1) NEW DELH, DELHI vs. JEEN FOUNDATION, DELHI

In the result, the grounds raised by the revenue are accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

1)(ac) (i) dated 23.09.2021 was granted for the period from AY 2022- 23 to 2026-27. The registration dated 23.09.2021 has been accorded without any classification of specified limb of charitable purpose. From the information available on record, it is evident that the appellant has never been engaged in any other activities or business other that imparting education

ACIT (E) CIRCLE-1(1) NEW DEHI, DELHI vs. JEEN FOUNDATION, DELHI

In the result, the grounds raised by the revenue are accordingly dismissed

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

1)(ac) (i) dated 23.09.2021 was granted for the period from AY 2022- 23 to 2026-27. The registration dated 23.09.2021 has been accorded without any classification of specified limb of charitable purpose. From the information available on record, it is evident that the appellant has never been engaged in any other activities or business other that imparting education

MAHASHIAN DI HATTI (P) LTD,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT-4, NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

section 114 of\nEvidence Act raises presumption that official acts have been\nregularly done. There are no reasons to presume that the\nFAU has not followed the said SOP.\n1.1 As per the SOP, the initial notice_u/s_142(1) was\nrequired to be issued considering 360% information/portal\netc. where all the information including history and other\nnature of business

GOPURI CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

AC OF THE ACT RS. 45,58,990/- : 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] erred in confirming the denial of Deduction claimed by the Appellant for a sum of Rs. 4^5,58,990/- under Chapter VI-A / Section 80GGA read with Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI vs. BHUSHAN DUA, NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

disallowance of Rs. 6,00,000/-. Thus, the addition to the tune of only Rs. 32,50,000/- is confirmed. 133. Coming to the item of expenditure of Rs. 54,36,000/- in the nature of referral commission which is appearing at Sl. No. 5 in the above table. The said amount has been paid by the appellant company

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. BHUSHAN DUA, DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

disallowance of Rs. 6,00,000/-. Thus, the addition to the tune of only Rs. 32,50,000/- is confirmed. 133. Coming to the item of expenditure of Rs. 54,36,000/- in the nature of referral commission which is appearing at Sl. No. 5 in the above table. The said amount has been paid by the appellant company

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 03, DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

disallowance of Rs. 6,00,000/-. Thus, the addition to the tune of only Rs. 32,50,000/- is confirmed. 133. Coming to the item of expenditure of Rs. 54,36,000/- in the nature of referral commission which is appearing at Sl. No. 5 in the above table. The said amount has been paid by the appellant company

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

disallowance of Rs. 6,00,000/-. Thus, the addition to the tune of only Rs. 32,50,000/- is confirmed. 133. Coming to the item of expenditure of Rs. 54,36,000/- in the nature of referral commission which is appearing at Sl. No. 5 in the above table. The said amount has been paid by the appellant company

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. BHUSHAN DUA, DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

disallowance of Rs. 6,00,000/-. Thus, the addition to the tune of only Rs. 32,50,000/- is confirmed. 133. Coming to the item of expenditure of Rs. 54,36,000/- in the nature of referral commission which is appearing at Sl. No. 5 in the above table. The said amount has been paid by the appellant company

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD., DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

disallowance of Rs. 6,00,000/-. Thus, the addition to the tune of only Rs. 32,50,000/- is confirmed. 133. Coming to the item of expenditure of Rs. 54,36,000/- in the nature of referral commission which is appearing at Sl. No. 5 in the above table. The said amount has been paid by the appellant company

SUPER CASSETTES INDUSTRIES PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

disallowance of Rs. 6,00,000/-. Thus, the addition to the tune of only Rs. 32,50,000/- is confirmed. 133. Coming to the item of expenditure of Rs. 54,36,000/- in the nature of referral commission which is appearing at Sl. No. 5 in the above table. The said amount has been paid by the appellant company