THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S NAVODAYA GRAMA VIKAS CHARITABLE TRUST

PDF · subscribers
ITA/308/2019HC KarnatakaKAHC01040156201921 December 2021Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no substantial question of law arises for consideration. The court concurred with the decisions of coordinate benches in similar cases regarding the entitlement of charitable trusts to such relief.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the ITAT's order which set aside the disallowance of set off and carry forward of excess expenditure for a charitable trust. The assessing officer had disallowed this on the grounds that the trust was not entitled to such relief and had not maintained profit and loss accounts.

What were the issues?

Whether a charitable trust is entitled to set off and carry forward of excess expenditure, and whether the ITAT was correct in setting aside the disallowance made by the assessing officer on this ground.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY I.T.A.NO.308/2019 BETWEEN: 1. The Pr.Commissioner of Income-Tax, CIT (A), C.R.Building Attavara Mangaluru-575 001. 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle-1 C.R.Building Attavara Mangaluru-575 001.

… APPELLANTS (By Sri.K.V.Aravind, Adv. a/w Sri.Dilip.M., Adv.) AND: M/s.Navodaya Grama Vikas Charitable Trust 14-7-1005, SCDCC Bank Limited Head Office Building Kodaialbail Manglauru-575 003.

… RESPONDENT (By Sri. Annamalai.S., Adv. a/w Sri Bhairav Kuttaiah, Adv.)

2 This ITA is filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, praying to allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru, in ITA No.738/Bang/2018 dated 27.06.2018 for Assessment Year 2012-2013 Annexure-C and confirm the order of the Appellate Commissioner confirming the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangaluru, etc. This appeal coming on for hearing this day, S.SUJATHA J., delivered the following: J U D G M E N T

This appeal is filed by the Revenue challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 'C' Bench, Bengaluru, in ITA No.738/Bang/2018 dated 27th June 2018 relating to the assessment year 2012- 13. The appeal has been admitted to consider the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the cases, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside disallowance made by assessing officer in respect of set off and carry forward of excess expenditure even though the same is justified as assessee being a Charitable Trust is not entitled for such relief? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside the disallowance made by assessing authority with regard to set off and carry forward of excess expenditure even though the assessing

3 authority rightly rejected the said claim after noting that assessee has not maintained profit and loss accounts, when there is no loss itself, the question of forward of the same does not arise?"

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent - Society would point out that the issue involved herein is squarely covered by the decision of the Co- ordinate Bench of this court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions), Bangalore -vs- Ohio University Christ College1, which has been further reiterated in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) -vs- Manipal Academy of Higher Education2.

3.

Learned counsel for the revenue does not dispute the same.

4.

We have perused the judgments referred to by the learned counsel for the respondent. 1 (2018) 408 ITR 352 (Karnataka) 2 (2019) 111 taxmann.com 243 (Karnataka)

5.

In view of the aforesaid submissions and on perusal of the citations referred to by the learned counsel for the respondent as aforesaid, we are of the considered view that no substantial question of law arises for our consideration as we concur with the decisions rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this court referred to above.

The appeal stands disposed of, accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE KNM/-

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →