M/S. GOPAL GOVARDHAN GOSHALA,SANCHORE, JALORE. vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-EXEMPTION, JODHPUR

ITA 189/JODH/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur20 January 2023AY 2014-156 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the AO denied exemption due to alleged violations of Section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d). The assessee contended there were no violations and that only income related to violations should be taxed. Both parties agreed to restore the issues to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, claimed exemption under Section 11. The AO denied this exemption due to alleged violations of Section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) by holding shares in a private company and investing in land in the names of trustees/employees. Additions were made under Section 40A(3) and for notional interest.

What were the issues?

Whether the trust violated provisions of Section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) by its investments, and if so, whether exemption under Section 11 should be denied entirely or on a pro-rata basis.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12,Section 13(1)(c),Section 13(1)(d),Section 11(5),Section 40A(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

Before: SHRI B. R. BASKARAN & Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI

For Appellant: Shri Vardhman Jain, CA, Shri Sanjeev Kumar Dev
Hearing: 18/01/2023

PER: B. R. BASKARAN, AM The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 28-03-2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Jodhpur for the assessment year 2014-15. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under:-

‘’1. The Ld. CI(A) has erred on the facts and in law in confirming the denial of the benefit u/s 11 and 12 on the ground that the appellant has violated the provision of Section 13(1)( c),

13(1)(d) by – (a) holding of shares of Rs.11,200/- in a company called M/s. Parthvimeda Panchgavy Utpad Pvt. Ltd. (b) investing Rs.36,10,000/- in land in the names of the trustee/ employees.

2.

The Ld. CIT(A) has a sequel, erred in law and on fact in confirming an addition of Rs.45,39,689/- u/s 40(A)(3) of the Income

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →