GREAT EASTERN EXPORTS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

80G or [section 80GGA or section 80GGC] or section 80HH or section 80HHA or section 80HHB or section 80HHC or section 80HHD or section 80-I or section 80-IA [or section 80-IB] [or section 80-IC] [or section 80-ID or section 80-IE] or section 80J or section 80JJ, no deduction under the same section shall

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES (INTERNATIONAL) PRIVATE LTD,HARYANA vs. CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

house property as reported in form 26AS of the assessee. A questionnaire in this regard was issued by the AO through u/s 142(1) dated 03.02.2021. After considering the response of the assessee the AO observed as under; "On perusal of Form 26AS it is found that assessee has received rental income of Rs. 6,34,45,795/- on account

TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. ACME EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY

Appeal is dismissed but with no order as to costs

houses in India for residential purposes and which is [eligible for deduction under] clause (viii) of sub-section (1) of section 36; [(ixa) deposits with or investment in any bonds issued by a public company formed and registered in India with the main object of carrying on the business of providing long- term finance for urban infrastructure in India. Explanation

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

NIIT FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyniit Foundation, Vs. Cit(E), Plot No. 8, Balaji Estate, New Delhi Sudarshan Munjal Marg, Kalkaji, New Delhi Pan: Aacan3951E (Appellant) (Respondent)

80G (5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide order no. DlT(E)/2007-08/N- 845/136 dated 07.03.2008. As per the assessee, it is a society registered on 01st December 2004 under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 with the main object promote, support and strengthen education, research, and training of Information Technology and its application in all fields of activity

MICROSOFT INDIA (R&D) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

House Property’ instead of ‘Income from Other Sources’ completely disregarding the provisions of Section 56 of the Act and Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court Judgment in the case of Garq Dyeing & Processing Industries vs. ACIT (2012) (ITA 319/2012) (Del) (Departmental SLP has been dismissed by Supreme Court). 15.1 That on the facts

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

In the result ITA No. 4384 and 4385/del/2019 are allowed and ITA numbers 4633 to 4636 /Del/ 2019 are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

5. Insofar as the appeal of the assessee are concerned, first challenge relates to the disallowance of the donation made by the assessee. Assessee pleaded in the alternative to allow the deduction under section 80G of the Act on the amount of donation paid by the assessee during the previous year relevant to the concerned assessment year

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

In the result ITA No. 4384 and 4385/del/2019 are allowed and ITA numbers 4633 to 4636 /Del/ 2019 are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

5. Insofar as the appeal of the assessee are concerned, first challenge relates to the disallowance of the donation made by the assessee. Assessee pleaded in the alternative to allow the deduction under section 80G of the Act on the amount of donation paid by the assessee during the previous year relevant to the concerned assessment year

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

house in Green Park, New Delhi. No material has been brought before us to rebut the factual findings of the ld. CIT(A). On consideration of ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 18 the materials on the file, the past record of the society, the year to year services rendered by Mrs. Sudha Tewari from its inception

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

house in Green Park, New Delhi. No material has been brought before us to rebut the factual findings of the ld. CIT(A). On consideration of ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 18 the materials on the file, the past record of the society, the year to year services rendered by Mrs. Sudha Tewari from its inception

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

house in Green Park, New Delhi. No material has been brought before us to rebut the factual findings of the ld. CIT(A). On consideration of ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 18 the materials on the file, the past record of the society, the year to year services rendered by Mrs. Sudha Tewari from its inception

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

house in Green Park, New Delhi. No material has been brought before us to rebut the factual findings of the ld. CIT(A). On consideration of ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 18 the materials on the file, the past record of the society, the year to year services rendered by Mrs. Sudha Tewari from its inception

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

house in Green Park, New Delhi. No material has been brought before us to rebut the factual findings of the ld. CIT(A). On consideration of ITA No. 1142/DEL/2011, 2675/DEL/2013, 2871, 2872/DEL/2014 & 1131/DEL/2016 18 the materials on the file, the past record of the society, the year to year services rendered by Mrs. Sudha Tewari from its inception

MUKUT BEHARI LAL BHARGAVA,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE(2)1, GURGAON

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalmukut Behari Lal Bhargava, Acit, Lcg 05, 04B Laburnum Complex, Circle-2(1), 1 4Th Floor, Sushant Lok 1, Vs. Gurgaon. Block-A, Sector-28 Haryana-122009. Pan-Adipb9356P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Shri Pradumna Kumar Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A) In Short] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Gurugaon-1/10738/2018-19 Dated 05.02.2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, In Short) For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,20,41,040/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Limited Scrutiny & During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Has Issued Various Notices Which Were Replied By The Assessee. Mukut Behari Lal Bhargava Vs. Acit 3. Thereafter, The Assessment Order Was Passed At A Total Income Of Rs.1,79,36,182/- By Making Disallowance On Account Of Expenses Claimed On Costs Of Improvement Of Capital Asset, Disallowance Of Carry Forward Of Short Term Capital Gains & Long Term Capital Loss & Also Denied The Deduction Claimed U/S 80G Of The Act.

5. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. In Ground of appeal No. 1 assessee has challenged the denial of deduction claimed towards indexed cost of improvement from the computation of long terms capital gains arising out of the sale of house property. From the perusal of appellate order, it is seen that

RAJIV GANDHI CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT (EXEMPTION), RANGE- 2, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudhryrajiv Gandhi Charitable Vs. Jcit (Exemption) Trust, Jawahar Bhawan, Range – 2 3Rd Floor, Rajendra Prasad New Delhi Road, New Delhi

80G(5)(vi) of the Act. Assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2014-15 on 29.09.2014 declaring nil income. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27.12.2016 by denying claim of sale of assets as application of income. 2. Aggrieved by the order

THE MANAGING COMMITTEE AMINIA MUSLIM GIRLS SCHOOL,DELHI vs. PR. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The impugned order passed by the Ld. PCIT is against the facts of the case as well as law. 3. The observations made in the impugned order by the Ld. PCIT are against the facts of the case as well as law.” 3. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication

THE MANAGING COMMITTEE,DELHI vs. PR. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The impugned order passed by the Ld. PCIT is against the facts of the case as well as law. 3. The observations made in the impugned order by the Ld. PCIT are against the facts of the case as well as law.” 3. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication

M/S FISERV INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

80G of the Act. The Assessing Officer noticed that neither the assessee has claimed such deduction in its return of income nor the return of income was revised but the same has been claimed in the computation of income. Applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz India