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

C) read with section 13(3); thirdly, computation of income consequent to denial of exemption under section 11/ 12 of the Act; fourthly, ad hoc disallowance

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

C) read with section 13(3); thirdly, computation of income consequent to denial of exemption under section 11/ 12 of the Act; fourthly, ad hoc disallowance

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

C) read with section 13(3); thirdly, computation of income consequent to denial of exemption under section 11/ 12 of the Act; fourthly, ad hoc disallowance

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

C) read with section 13(3); thirdly, computation of income consequent to denial of exemption under section 11/ 12 of the Act; fourthly, ad hoc disallowance

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)

disallowance of Rs 20,50,491/- being exorbitantly high rate of interest paid to the persons specified in section 13(3) of the I.T. Act which was diversion of the trust funds to specified persons u/s 13(3) of the I.T Act 1961. (4) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred

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

disallowance of the exemption under Section 11 on the ground of violation of Section 13(1)(c)(ii) read with Section 13(3

ANAND EDUCATION SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT (E), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 761/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Anand Education Society, Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax(E) 30, Community Centre, Ashok Trust Circle-Ii, Vihar, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110052 (Appellant) (Respondent)

C) 5467/2010, the AO was barred from passing the final assessment order. However, on 02.02.2012, the Hon’ble High Court directed the AO to proceed in accordance with law. The AO made the addition of Rs.1,16,57,941/- out of the development fund by observing that the assessee violated the provisions of Section 13(3

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. ANAND EDUCATION SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 761/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Anand Education Society, Vs Asstt. Director Of Income Tax(E) 30, Community Centre, Ashok Trust Circle-Ii, Vihar, Phase-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110052 (Appellant) (Respondent)

C) 5467/2010, the AO was barred from passing the final assessment order. However, on 02.02.2012, the Hon’ble High Court directed the AO to proceed in accordance with law. The AO made the addition of Rs.1,16,57,941/- out of the development fund by observing that the assessee violated the provisions of Section 13(3

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

c) IILM Early College at Lodhi Road. 6. The Assessee had filed its return of income for AY 2009-10 on 29.09.2009 disclosing nil income. The said return was picked up for scrutiny and the proceedings culminated in the assessment order dated 26.12.2011 passed under Section 143(3) of the Act. 7. The registration granted to the Assessee under Section

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION DELHI vs. IILM FOUNDATION

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

c) IILM Early College at Lodhi Road. 6. The Assessee had filed its return of income for AY 2009-10 on 29.09.2009 disclosing nil income. The said return was picked up for scrutiny and the proceedings culminated in the assessment order dated 26.12.2011 passed under Section 143(3) of the Act. 7. The registration granted to the Assessee under Section

JAN KALYAN SAMITI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD EXEMPTION, GHAZIABAD

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanjan Kalyan Samiti Vs. Ito Ward Exemption A-48, Chander Nagar Sahibabad, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad 201002 (Pan: Aaatj5583B)

disallowance u/s 13(2)(e) of the Act of Rs. 69,00,000/-. 13. Aggrieved with the above order assessee preferred an appeal before NFAC Delhi and filed a detailed submissions which are reproduced in the impugned 7 order. After considering the detailed submissions of the assessee and findings in the assessment order he proceeded to sustain the addition made

M/S HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,,NOIDA vs. ACIT (TDS), NOIDA

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihcl Technologies Ltd, Acit(Tds), Plot No. 3A, Tower 6, 14Th Floor, Vs. Noida Sector-126, Noida Pan: Aaach1645P (Appellant) (Respondent)

C”: NEW DELHI ] (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HCL Technologies Ltd, ACIT(TDS), Plot No. 3A, Tower 6, 14th Floor, Vs. Noida Sector-126, Noida PAN: AAACH1645P (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Assessee by : Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv., Shri Aditya Vohra, Adv., & Shri Arpit Goyal, C.A. Department

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

section 13(1)(c). In the said case, Commissioner (Appeals) as well as Tribunal opined that having regard to fair market value of property, rent paid was not excessive - Moreover, rent had been valued as per prevailing rate fixed for purpose of stamp duty. In view of the facts discussed above and judicial precedents ches supra, it is held that

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE , GHAZIABAD vs. JAY SINGH SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN, FARRUKHAAD

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

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

disallowance to the extent of Rs.36.70 lakhs with the following observation :- “Further, the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in arriving at an erroneous conclusion that the provisions of section 13 were violated by assessee. There is no violation of any of the provision of section 13 particularly section 13(1 )(c) and section13(3

W SERVE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

Disallowance of business expenditure on account of non- deduction of tax on payment to resident payee …………………………………. (Not reproduced as not relevant) III. Fee and penalty for delay in furnishing of TDS/TCS Statement and penalty for incorrect information in TDS/TCS Statement As per the existing provisions of the Income-tax Act, a deductor is required to furnish a periodical TDS statement

W SERVE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharma

Disallowance of business expenditure on account of non- deduction of tax on payment to resident payee …………………………………. (Not reproduced as not relevant) III. Fee and penalty for delay in furnishing of TDS/TCS Statement and penalty for incorrect information in TDS/TCS Statement As per the existing provisions of the Income-tax Act, a deductor is required to furnish a periodical TDS statement

DCIT CC-2 , FARIDABAD vs. A2Z MAINTENANCE AND ENGINEERING SERVICES LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

3 of the assessment order has admitted that the disclosure made under Section 132(4) of Rs.65 lakh was duly included in the return of income and assessed without any demur. The Assessing Officer however observed that without search, such disclosure would not have come and therefore, he is satisfied that assessee is liable to pay penalty under Section

DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, FARIDABAD vs. A2Z INFRA ENGINEERS LTD., GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

3 of the assessment order has admitted that the disclosure made under Section 132(4) of Rs.65 lakh was duly included in the return of income and assessed without any demur. The Assessing Officer however observed that without search, such disclosure would not have come and therefore, he is satisfied that assessee is liable to pay penalty under Section