PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S NITIN SPINNERS LTD.

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SANDEEP MEHTA,VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

trust has several objects, some of which are charitable and others are non-charitable and the trustees have unfettered discretion to apply the income to any of the objects, the whole claim for exemption would fail and no part of the income would be exempted from tax. The respondent Society is engaged in commercial activities and cannot be considered

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL, vs. MS. HARSHITA MAHESHWARI,

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,SHUBHA MEHTA

25. It is submitted that the two Joint ALPs have made observation that HVL has been acting against the interest of PDB's estate is incorrect and in this regard, the learned Senior Counsel referred to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by RSL dated 10th May, 2005 to state that the consistent stand from the very beginning was that

M/S FINGROWTH COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH,SAMEER JAIN

25. It is submitted that the two Joint ALPs have made observation that HVL has been acting against the interest of PDB's estate is incorrect and in this regard, the learned Senior Counsel referred to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by RSL dated 10th May, 2005 to state that the consistent stand from the very beginning was that

SHRI VIJAY MAKHIJA S/O SHRI GOVIND RAM MAKHIJA vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF TAX-I

Bench: SABINA,PRAKASH GUPTA

charitable purpose” (w.e.f. 1-4-2009), as well as the later amendments, and other related provisions of the IT Act. A. General test under Section 2(15) 270. It is clarified that an assessee advancing general public utility cannot engage itself in any trade, commerce or business, or provide service in relation thereto for any consideration (“cess