2013 (8) TMI 974
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mber) 1. The revenue has questioned the first appellate order on the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in allowing the benefits of exemption u/s 11 &12 of the Act. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of corpus donation of Rs. 13,83,000/- to the returned income of the assessee trust u/s 68 of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome-tax Vs. Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation (2005) 278 ITR 152 (Delhi). ii) CIT Vs. M/s All Saints College Society, Nainital (I.T.A. t :4Nos. 282 to 287 of 2007 and Others (Uttarakhand High Court); iii) Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority Vs. Deputy Director of Income-tax (E) (2011) 335 ITR 575 (Guj.); iv) ACIT Vs. Geetanjali Education Society (2008) 114 (Jodhpur) 697;ideal Educati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ished and these parties are also having PAN and are assessed to tax. He has placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(E) Vs. Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation (supra) wherein the Hon'ble High Court has been pleased to uphold the action of the Tribunal that addition u/s 68 was not correct and exemption u/s 11 could not be denied. In that case, asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....charitable purposes. Since the above material findings of the learned CIT(A) regarding application of donations was for charitable purposes and furnishing of list of donors along with their identity by furnishing the amount through account payee cheques, their being PAN holders and their assessment to tax has not been rebutted by the revenue before the Tribunal, we do not find reason to interfere ....