TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (7) TMI 73
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 4th May, 2009 whereby the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA No. 2344/Del of 2008 against the order dated 10th April, 2008 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), in respect of A.Y.2005-06, was dismissed. 2. The assessee foundation was setup in order to provide fees, books, equipments and scholarship, etc. to needy students, to help mentally retard....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee was a tool in the hands of the parent company, that is, HCL Perot System. Accordingly, he denied benefit of exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the assessee and determined its taxable income at Rs.70,98,120/- and expense of Rs.10,00,820/- inclusive of depreciation. 3. On appeal filed by the assessee, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted the addition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... finding recorded by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 5. We have heard Ms. Bansal, learned counsel for the revenue on the question of admission. Section 13 of Income Tax Act stipulates the circumstances in which the income of a trust will not be exempted from its income. In the present case, as noted by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), there was no material on record to suggest that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... elements to these donations without even indicating any circumstance which could give rise to such an inference. The order passed by the Assessing Officer does not show that the Directors of HCL Perot Systems were connected with these organizations or were managing their affairs. The payments to all the organizations were made by account payee cheques. Confirmations from 41 out of 43 organization....