DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E), CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE vs. M/S. KARNATAKA STATE MUSLIM FEDERATION, BANGALORE
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeal was defective and the issue was covered by the Supreme Court decision in CIT vs. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The revenue filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). The appeal was found to be defective and the defects remained unrectified. The issue raised was also covered by a Supreme Court decision.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal filed by the revenue was maintainable due to defects and whether the issue was covered by a Supreme Court judgment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide 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.
- Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT164 citing209 Taxmann 19 · 2012 · Read judgment
- Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona130 citing89 Taxmann.com 127 · 2018 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, BENGALURU
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
O R D E R
Per SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JM:
This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-14, LTU, [CIT(A)], Bengaluru, dated 31/05/2017.
The revenue raised the following grounds of appeal:
At the outset, it is noticed that the appeal is defective and the same is liable to be dismissed since the defects pointed out by the Registry remain unrectified. Moreover, we notice that the issue raised by the revenue is covered against the revenue by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona (2018)(89 Taxman.com127)(SC) wherein it was held as under: “2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the aforesaid view taken by the Bombay High Court correctly states the principles of law and there is no need to interfere with the same. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344 (Ker.)'.
It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that the said amendment is prospective in nature.”
Page 3 of 3 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Vocational Education Foundation, New Delhi vs ACIT, Exemptions, GhaziabadDelhi6 Oct 2021Allowed
The Tribunal held that the assessee's primary object of providing education is charitable. It ruled that depreciation disallowed by the AO is allowable and that the assessee is entitled to exemptions under Sections 11 an...
- Malik Educational Society, Ghaziabad vs Addl. CIT, GhaziabadDelhi28 Nov 2018Partly Allowed
The Tribunal held that the withdrawal of exemption under Section 11 and 12 was not justified as the assessee's registration under Section 12AA was not cancelled. Regarding depreciation, the Tribunal followed the Supreme ...
- ITO (E) 2(2), Mumbai vs Rustom Irani Foundation Ideal Farm, MumbaiMumbai25 Jul 2018Dismissed
The Tribunal held that depreciation on assets acquired from trust income is allowable, following the Supreme Court's decision in CIT Vs. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation, Poona. It also held that carry forward ...
- The Dy.DIT (Exemption), Ahmedabad vs Shree Monark Education Trust, AhmedabadAhmedabad30 Jan 2018Dismissed
The Tribunal held that depreciation is allowable on assets even if their cost was treated as application of income in the year of acquisition. This is based on the principle that normal depreciation is a legitimate deduc...
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs M/S. Karnataka Industrial Area Development…Bangalore19 Oct 2020Dismissed
The Tribunal held that the first issue regarding the proviso to Section 2(15) was squarely covered in favor of the assessee by the Karnataka High Court's judgment in the assessee's own case. The second issue regarding de...
More judgments on Section 11(6)
- M/S. Brothers of the Sacred Heart of Jesus… vs ACIT, Exemptions, CoimbatoreITA 1584/CHNY/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs Indian Institute of Banking and Finance…ITA 3394/MUM/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed19 Aug 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT(Exemptions)-1(1), Mumbai vs Indian Institute of Banking and Finance…ITA 3393/MUM/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed19 Aug 2026AY 2017-18
- Saqlainia Shikchhan Prasar Samiti, Jhansi vs ITO Ward Exemption Agra Rcc, AgraITA 321/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed18 Aug 2026AY 2019-20
- Rotary Eye Institute, NaITA 375/AHD/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed11 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
