COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MANIPAL ALUMNI OF NEPHROLOGY TRUST

PDF · subscribers
ITA/319/2014HC KarnatakaKAHC01025745201425 August 2015Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no substantial question of law arose for determination. The court's decision was based on a prior judgment of a co-ordinate bench in a similar case.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax appealed against an ITAT order granting registration under Section 12A and recognition under Section 80G to a trust. The core issue was whether the trust had commenced its activities as required by Section 12AA(1)(b).

What were the issues?

Whether a trust that has not commenced its activities can be granted registration under Section 12A and recognition under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A,Section 80G,Section 12AA(1)(b),Section 260-A

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.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B MANOHAR ITA No.320/2014 c/w ITA No.319/2014

IN ITA NO.320/2014:

BETWEEN :

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MANGALORE

…APPELLANT (BY SRI.E.I.SANMATHI, ADV.)

AND:

M/S. MANIPAL ALUMNI OF NEPHROLOGY TRUST “SANJEEVANI” OPP.BHARATH PETROL PUMP FALNIR MANGALORE – 575001.

…RESPONDENT

2 (RESPONDENT SERVED)

The advocate for the appellant has filed the above ITA / Income Tax Appeal Under Sec.260-A of Income Tax Act 1961, arising out of order dated 21/02/2014 and passed in ITA No.549/Bang/2013, for the Assessment Year NA praying to

1.

Decide the foregoing question of law and / or such other questions of law as may be formulated by the Hon’ble Court as deemed fit.

2.

Set aside the appellate order dated 21/02/2014 passed by the ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Bangalore in appeal proceedings No.ITA No.549/Bang/2013 for Assessment Period NA.

In ITA No.319/2014:

Between:

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MANGALORE

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI.E.I.SANMATHI, ADV.)

AND:

M/S. MANIPAL ALUMNI OF NEPHROLOGY TRUST “SANJEEVANI” OPP.BHARATH PETROL PUMP FALNIR

3 MANGALORE – 575001.

…RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED)

The advocate for the appellant has filed the above ITA / Income Tax Appeal Under Sec.260-A of Income Tax Act 1961, arising out of order dated 21/02/2014 and passed in ITA No.548/Bang/2013 praying to:

1.

Decide the foregoing question of law and / or such other questions of law as may be formulated by the Hon’ble Court as deemed fit.

2.

Set aside the appellate order dated 21/02/2014 passed by the ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Bangalore, in appeal proceedings No.ITA No.548/Bang/2013 for assessment year NA.

These appeals coming on for Admission this day, VINEET SARAN, J. delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

We have heard Sri E.I.Sanmathi, learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the record. 2. These appeals have been filed raising the following substantial question of law:

4 “Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee trust must be granted registration under Section 12A and recognition under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act despite the fact that it had not commenced activities and therefore, failed to satisfy the conditions laid down in Section 12AA(1)(b) of the Act?”

3.

Learned Counsel for the appellant does not dispute the fact that the question involved in these appeals is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. Meenakshi Amma Endowment Trust (2013) 354 ITR 219 (Karn).

4.

For the reasons given in the judgment of a co- ordinate Bench of this Court in the aforesaid case, we are of the opinion that no substantial question of law

5 arises for determination by this Court. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

JT/-

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →