ANAND JAIN HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

SATISH DEV JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

SAJAN KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

ANAND JAIN HUF,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

ANAND KUMAR JAIN,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-25, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

u/s 153A. 18. In the case of Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reiterated in paragraph 38 “Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal”. 19. Learned DR has relied upon several decisions

COMMITMENT MORTALITY VISION EDUCATION SOCIETY,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kant

147, section 148, Section 149, section 151 and Section 153, where the Assessing officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or asset

COMMITMENT MORTALITY VISION EDUCATION SOCIETY,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 6, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kant

147, section 148, Section 149, section 151 and Section 153, where the Assessing officer is satisfied that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then the books of account or documents or asset

ITO WARD - 23(3), NEW DELHI vs. SHREE BHAWANI POWER PROJECTS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

reassessment order which was passed on 07.12.2019, therefore, following the appellate order for A.Y. 2016-17, as referred above, the addition of Rs.1,85,97,591/- is hereby deleted and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act to the appellant. 8.2 In order to adjudicate the issue under controversy properly

ITO WARD - 23(3), NEW DELHI vs. SHREE BHAWANI POWER PROJECTS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

reassessment order which was passed on 07.12.2019, therefore, following the appellate order for A.Y. 2016-17, as referred above, the addition of Rs.1,85,97,591/- is hereby deleted and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act to the appellant. 8.2 In order to adjudicate the issue under controversy properly

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

1, 2, 4-9 Deeming the assessee as non-registered u/s 12A contrary to the provisions of the Act The primary issue in all the appeals pertains to wrongful denial of claim of exemption under section 11/12 of the Act by deeming the assessee as non- registered u/s 12A on the ground that the assessee has not been able

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

1, 2, 4-9 Deeming the assessee as non-registered u/s 12A contrary to the provisions of the Act The primary issue in all the appeals pertains to wrongful denial of claim of exemption under section 11/12 of the Act by deeming the assessee as non- registered u/s 12A on the ground that the assessee has not been able

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

1, 2, 4-9 Deeming the assessee as non-registered u/s 12A contrary to the provisions of the Act The primary issue in all the appeals pertains to wrongful denial of claim of exemption under section 11/12 of the Act by deeming the assessee as non- registered u/s 12A on the ground that the assessee has not been able

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

1, 2, 4-9 Deeming the assessee as non-registered u/s 12A contrary to the provisions of the Act The primary issue in all the appeals pertains to wrongful denial of claim of exemption under section 11/12 of the Act by deeming the assessee as non- registered u/s 12A on the ground that the assessee has not been able

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

1, 2, 4-9 Deeming the assessee as non-registered u/s 12A contrary to the provisions of the Act The primary issue in all the appeals pertains to wrongful denial of claim of exemption under section 11/12 of the Act by deeming the assessee as non- registered u/s 12A on the ground that the assessee has not been able

JAIBHARAT MANDAL RAMLILA AND DHARAMSHALA SOCIETY,HISAR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ROHTAK

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat1. Ita No. 5273/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) 2. Ita No. 5274/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3. Ita No. 5275/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2010-11) 4. Ita No. 5276/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2012-13) 5. Ita No. 5277/Del/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) 6. Ita No. 291/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2016-17)

1, 2, 4-9 Deeming the assessee as non-registered u/s 12A contrary to the provisions of the Act The primary issue in all the appeals pertains to wrongful denial of claim of exemption under section 11/12 of the Act by deeming the assessee as non- registered u/s 12A on the ground that the assessee has not been able

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MAHARAJI EDUCATION TRUST, GHAZIABAD

The appeal are dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

reassessment order under appeal. iii. Likewise in subsequent years, there is no denial of exemption u/s 11 in the Hon’ble Income Tax Settlement Commission order dt: 27.11.2015 (PB 104-133) and also acknowledgment of the fact that in para 8 to 8.3 at pages 117-118 that the registration u/s 12AA and notification under 10(23C)(vi) has been

AP GOYAL CHARITABLE TRUST,EAST DELHI, DELHI INDIA vs. ITO, CIVIC CENTRE,NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

12A of eh Act. The assessment was originally completed u/s 143(3) at Nil. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of information received from DCIT, Central Circle, Mumbai that assessee has received bogus donation from M./s Anandilal & Ganesh Podar Society of Rs.50,00,000/- lacs and based on such information