DAYSPRING ENTERPRISES OF INDIA,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO., EXEMPTION WARD-1(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1261/HYD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 October 2025AY 2016-171 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had merely corrected an inadvertent error in the accumulation of income, not made a fresh claim, and thus the Goetze (India) Ltd. case was not applicable. The Assessing Officer erred in not admitting the corrected calculation.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption under Section 11. An error in calculating the accumulation of income led to a perceived shortfall. The Assessing Officer rejected the corrected calculation, citing the Goetze (India) Ltd. case, and made additions. The CIT(A) upheld the additions.

What were the issues?

Whether a corrected calculation of income accumulation under Section 11 can be admitted without filing a revised return, and if the Goetze (India) Ltd. case applies to such corrections.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 11(1)(a),Section 11(2),Section 139(1),Section 143(3),Section 263

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, Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad

आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. 1. निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Dayspring Enterprises of India, 2-2-95, Logos Bhavan, Medchal Road, Jeedimetla Village, Secunderabad – 500067. 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward -1(1), Hyderabad.

More judgments on Section 11

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →