Ita/1011/2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -Exemption v. Delhi Bureau Of Text Books
High Court
14 Sep 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Ita/1011/2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -Exemption v. Delhi Bureau Of Text Books
Date of order
14 Sep 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/1011/2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -Exemption v. Delhi Bureau Of Text Books, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
$~25
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 1011/2018 & CM Appl. 37729/2018 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -EXEMPTION
..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Adv.
versus
DELHI BUREAU OF TEXT BOOKS ..... Respondent Through
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR O R D E R% 14.09.2018
Revenue in the present appeal submits and argues that Delhi Bureau of Textbooks, a society jointly set up by the Government of India, Ministry of Education, and Government of NCT of Delhi, to ensure timely supply of prescribed textbooks at fair prices to school students and to improve quality of primary and secondary school education, is not engaged in charitable activity. It is submitted that the Society is conducting business, and commercial activities.
This contention has to be rejected in view of decisions of this Court in
Delhi Bureau of Text Books v. Director of Income Tax (Exemption),(2017),394 ITR 387 (Del), The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India & Anr. vs. The Director General of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi & Ors., (2012) 347 ITR 99 (Del), M/s GS1 India vs. Director General of Income Tax (Exemption) & Anr.,(2014)360 ITR 138
(Del) and India Trade Promotion Organization v. Director General of Income Tax (Exemption) & Ors., (2015) 371 ITR 333 (Del).
By the first decision, earlier appeal preferred by the Revenue in the case of respondent/assessee has been dismissed.
In view of the aforesaid position, we do not feel any substantial question of law arises and is required to be framed. Accordingly, we are not issuing notice in the application for condonation of delay of 213 days in re-filing the appeal. This application and the appeal would be treated as dismissed.
SANJIV KHANNA, J
SEPTEMBER 14, 2018 rk
CHANDER SHEKHAR, J
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.