Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT

224 ITR 310Supreme Court of India1997#865 most cited

What is Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT authority for?

A charitable educational institution or trust does not lose its charitable character merely because it generates a surplus, provided its primary object remains charitable and it does not operate for profit. The assessment of charitable nature should focus on the institution's objects rather than the quantum of surplus generated.

121

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,359 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Aditanar Educational Institution v Addl CIT · charitable trust · educational institution exemption · section 11 · section 10(23C) · surplus income · not for profit · objects of institution · Section 12AA · Section 12A · charitable purpose · ancillary activities

Also reported as

90 Taxmann 528

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 12AASection 12ASection 139(4A)Section 142(1)Section 10(23C)(v)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 10(22)section 11(4a)corpus fundsection 10(23c)(vi)proviso to section 2(15)section 10(23c)section 2(15)section 11(1)application of incomesection 12aaregistration under section 12asection 12a

Judgments citing Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT

Roland Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ganjam vs. Principal CCIT, Bhubaneswar

ITA 432/CTK/2015[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 May 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singhroland Educational & Charitable Trust, Vs. Principal Cit, 2Nd Lane, Gandhi Nagar, Bhubaneshwar, Berhampur, Odisha. District – Ganjam (Odisha).

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 10

…for educational purposes and not for purposes of profit, three Supreme Court judgments, namely, Addl.CIT vs. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufactures Association – (1980) 121 ITR 1, Aditanar ITA No.433/CTK./2015 19 Educational Institution vs. Addl. CIT – (1997) 224 ITR 310 (SC) and American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute vs. CBDT – (2008) 301 ITR 86 (SC) would apply. Hon’ble Apex Court further held that 13th Proviso to section 10(23C) is of great importance in determining the issue that the AO must continuously monitor from assessment year to assessment year whether such institutions contin…

ACIT(Exemption), Jaipur vs. Mahima Shiksha Samiti, Jaipur

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

ITA 105/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Mar 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar (CIT)
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 32

…and it would really be for profit. The Hon’ble Supreme Court negated the said line of arguments put forward by Revenue and referred to its earlier decisions rendered in case of Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturing (121 ITR 1), Aditanar Educational Institution (224 ITR 310) and American Hotel & lodging Assn. Educational Institute (301 ITR 86) and laid down the following principles in law as set out in paragraph 11 of its decision which reads as under: “11..the law common to section 10(23C)(iiiad) and (vi) may be summed up as follows: (1) Where an educational institution carries on the activity of education primari…

Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas), Delhi vs. ADIT(Exemption), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2267/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri N. C. Swain, CIT [DR]
Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 13Section 142Section 2(15)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ( DELHI BENCH “F” NEW DELHI ) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L. P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2267/Del./2013 Assessment Year : 2009–10 Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas) ADIT [Exemptions] D–13, Pushpanjali Enclave, Vs. Range : II, Pitampura, DELHI. New Delhi. PAN : AABTP 0560 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv.; & Shri Rohit Jain, Adv.; Respondent by : Shri N. C. Swain, CIT [DR]; Date of Hearing : 19.01.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 09.02.2017. O R D E R PER I. C. SUDHIR, J. M. : The assessee has questioned first appellate…

Gandhi College of Pharmacy, Karnal vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3476/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. C. M. Garg, Jm Ita No. 3476/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Gandhi College Of Pharmacy, Vs Acit, Near Iti Chowk, G. T. Road, Circle, Karnal Karnal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatg5629D Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Ashish Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.03.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A), Karnal. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Is Bad Both In The Eye Of Law & On Facts. 2(I) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Action Of A.O. In Holding That The Assesses Is Not Eligible For Exemption Under Section 10(23C)(Iiiad) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv., & Ashish Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 139Section 143(3)Section 2(31)Section 263(1)

…ore, the assessee fulfils all the conditions laid down U/S 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act for claim of exemption of income. Which was rightly being allowed to the assessee previously. c) Hon'ble Supreme Court in Aditanar Educational Institution etc. Add CIT (1997) 224 ITR 310(SC) has held that "The language of Section 10(22) is plain and clear and the availability of exemption should be evaluated each year to find out whether the institution existed during the relevant year solely for educational purposes and not for the purposes of profits. "After meeting the expenditure, if any surplus results incidentally from the…

DCIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Karuna Medica Society, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6650/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Jason P Boaz, Am Asst. Cit(A) (Exemption), M/S Karuna Medical Society, 1(1) Room No.506, 5 Th Floor, Jeevan Bima Nagar, Borivali(W) Vs. Parimal Chamber, Lilbaug, Mumbai-400103 Mumbai-400012 Pan No.Aaatk0426A Appellant .. Respondent Revenue By .. Shri. B.S Bist, Dr Assessee By .. Ms. Aarti Vissanji, Ar Date Of Hearing .. 09-01-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 09-01-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(3)

…the language used in the section is kept in juxtaposition with various decisions, it can be said that the dominant nature of the purpose for which the trust exist has to be considered. The ratio laid down in Aditanar Educational Institution etc. vs Addl. CIT 224 ITR 310 (SC) wherein, the Hon’ble Apex Court, while construing the provisions of section 10(22) observed the decisive or acid test is whether on an overall view of the matter, the object has to be considered. Identically, Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Baun Foundation Trust vs Chief Commissioner (2012) 251 CTR (Bom) 237, wherein, identically, the a…

Kunti Naman Pharma & Technology Science Society, Haridwar vs. CIT, Dehradun

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 114/DEL/2014[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2017

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 2(15)

…poor or medical relief. 4. The Ld Counsel further placing reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Addl. CIT VS. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufactures Association [1980 121 ITR I (SC), Aditanar Educational Institution Vs. Addl. CIT [1997 224 ITR 310 (SC) and American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute Vs. CBDT [2008 301 ITR 86 (SC) submitted it is clear that when a surplus is ploughed for educational purposes the educational institution exists solely for educational purposes and not for purposes of profit. The Ld Counsel lastly pointed out that recently the Hon’ble Supreme…

ADIT (E), New Delhi vs. Hamdard Nation Foundation (India), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 1985/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. A.K. Saroha, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Sh. R.M. Mehta, Advocate
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1985/Del./2012 Asstt. Year : 2007-08 A.D.I.T. (E), TC-II, vs. Hamdard Nation Foundation (India), New Delhi. Hamdard Building, 2A/3, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi (PAN: AAATH 0843 G) C.O. No.231/Del./2012 (in ITA No. 1985/Del./2012) Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Hamdard Nation Foundation (India), vs. A.D.I.T. (E), TC-II, Hamdard Building, 2A/3, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. A.K. Saroha, CIT/DR Respondent by : Sh. R.M. Meh…

Asst CIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Karnuna Medical Society, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for the Asst

ITA 5861/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu (Am) & Shri. Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. A. RamchandranFor Respondent: Ms. Aarti Vissanji & Shri. Kashyap S
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…the language used in the section is kept in juxtaposition with various decisions, it can be said that the dominant nature of the purpose for which the trust exist has to be considered. The ratio laid down in Aditanar Educational Institution etc. vs Addl. CIT 224 ITR 310 (SC) wherein, the Hon’ble Apex Court, while construing the provisions of section 10(22) observed the decisive or acid test is whether on an overall view of the matter, the object has to be considered. Identically, Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Baun Foundation Trust vs Chief Commissioner (2012) 251 CTR (Bom) 237, wherein, identically, the a…

Asst CIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. National Health & Education Society, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 87/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2010 - 11 Asst. Cit (E) 2(1), National Health & Education Society, Mumbai C/O P D Hinduja National Hospital & Vs. Medical Research Centre, Veer Savarkar Marg, Mahim Mumbai – 400 016 Pan : Aaatn0093Q (Appellant) Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N P SinghFor Respondent: Shri S C Tiwari & Ms. Rutuja N Pawar
Section 10Section 10(22)Section 11Section 143(3)

…(Supra), which was of course delivered in the context of the provisions of section 10(23C) of the Act and find relevant to extract the relevant para which is as follows: “4. In Aditanar Education Institute Etc. v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1997) 224 ITR 310 (SC), the Supreme Court has observed, while construing the provisions of section 10(22) that the decisive or acid test is whether on an overall view of the matter the object is to make a profit. If after meeting the expenditure any surplus results incidentally from the activity lawfully carried on by the institution, it will not cease to be one e…

M/S Kammavari Sangam, Bangalore vs. DDIT, Bangalore

In the result, the orders of the CIT(Appeals) in ITA Nos

ITA 1099/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jun 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Venkatesan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-III &
Section 11

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.206 & 207/Bang/2014 Assessment years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 The Deputy Director of Vs. M/s. Kammavari Sangham, Income Tax (Exemptions), No.145/4, Mount Joy Extension, Circle 17(1), Hanumanthanagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 019. PAN: AAATK 2287R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment year : 2011-12 M/s. Kammavari Sangham, Vs. The Deputy Director of No.145/4, Mount Joy Extension, Income Tax (Exemptions), Hanumanthanagar, Circle 17(1), Bangalore – 560 019. Bangalor…

DDIT vs. M/S Kammavari Sangha

In the result, the orders of the CIT(Appeals) in ITA Nos

ITA 206/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Venkatesan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-III &
Section 11

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.206 & 207/Bang/2014 Assessment years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 The Deputy Director of Vs. M/s. Kammavari Sangham, Income Tax (Exemptions), No.145/4, Mount Joy Extension, Circle 17(1), Hanumanthanagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 019. PAN: AAATK 2287R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment year : 2011-12 M/s. Kammavari Sangham, Vs. The Deputy Director of No.145/4, Mount Joy Extension, Income Tax (Exemptions), Hanumanthanagar, Circle 17(1), Bangalore – 560 019. Bangalor…

Hiranandani Foundaiton, Mumbai vs. Asst DIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 560/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri A.N. Sontakke, DR
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 148Section 4A

…supra), which was of course delivered in the context of the provisions of section 10(23C) of the Act and find relevant to extract the relevant para which is as follows:- “4. In Aditanar Education Institute Etc. v . Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (1997) 224 ITR 310 (SC), the Supreme Court has observed, while construing the provisions of Section 10(22) that the decisive or acid test is whether on an overall view of the matter the object is to make a profit. If after meeting the expenditure any surplus results incidentally from the activity lawfully carried on by the institution, it will not cease to be one e…

M/S. Swami Satyanand Alternate Therapy Foundation, New Delhi vs. DIT (Exemptions), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed in the manner as indicated above

ITA 962/DEL/2014[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2016

Bench: Sh. G.D. Agrawal V.P. & Sh. C.M. Garg, J.M Swami Satyanand Alternate Vs Dit(Exemptions) Therapy Foundation New Delhi 1E/15, Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Aggarwal , Adv, & Sh. Sailesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Chand Sharma, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 2(15)

…motive which lead to a conclusion that the assessee trust is carrying out its activities akin to the commercial enterprise. 10. At this juncture it is relevant to mention that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Aditanar Educational Institution Vs ACIT 224 ITR 310 (SC) has held that charging of fee is not a bar for a charitable organization. It is also relevant to note that in the case of Sanjeevamma Hanumantha Gowda Charitable Trust Vs DIT(E) reported as 285 ITR 327 (Karnataka) their lordship have set out the guidelines for the purpose of grant of registration under section 12Aa of the Act and has held th…

M/S. Shree Balaji Educational Trust, Haridwar vs. CIT, Dehradun

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in the manner as indicated above

ITA 877/DEL/2014[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2016

Bench: Sh. G.D. Agrawal V.P. & Sh. C.M. Garg, J.M Shree Balaji Educational Trust Vs Cit C/O Anil Ashok & Associates, Ca Dehradun 1St Floor Verma Sweets, Arya Nagar, Jwalapur Haridwar Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Piyush Kaushik, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Munish Kumar, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)

…poor or medical relief. 4. The Ld Counsel further placing reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Addl. CIT VS. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufactures Association [1980 121 ITR I (SC), Aditanar Educational Institution Vs. Addl. CIT [1997 224 ITR 310 (SC) and American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute Vs. CBDT [2008 301 ITR 86 (SC) submitted it is clear that when a surplus is ploughed for educational purposes the educational institution exists solely for educational purposes and not for purposes of profit. The Ld Counsel lastly pointed out that recently the Hon’ble Supreme C…

M/S the Augustinian Society, Bangalore vs. Asst.DIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 973/BANG/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 10(22)Section 11(2)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2007-08 The Augustinian Society, Vs. The Assistant Director of # 126, 2nd Cross, 6th Block, Income Tax (Exemption), Koramangala Extension, Circle 17(2), Bangalore – 560 095. Bangalore. PAN: AAATA 1891K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan, CA Respondent by : Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 04.11.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 30.11.2015 O R D E R Per Asha Vijayaraghavan, Judicial Member This appeal by…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Aipeccs Society

ITA/924/2009HC Delhi07 Oct 2015
For Appellant: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent: Mr Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with
Section 10Section 158BSection 260A

…is family members. 22. Mr Sawhney referred to the following decisions in support of his contention that the Assessee was not eligible for claiming the benefit of Section 10(22) /10(23C) of the Act: (1) Aditanar Educational Institution v. ACIT: (1997) 224 ITR 310 (SC) (2) ACIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufactures Association: (1978) 121 ITR 1 (SC). (3) American Hotel & Lodging Association, Educational Institute v. CBDT: (2008) 301 ITR 86 (SC). (4) Vishvesvaraya Technological University v. ACIT: (2014) 362 ITR 279 (Karnataka). Submissions on behalf of the Assessee 23. Countering the argumen…

Commissioner of Income-tax-VI vs. Sri Premchand Kothari

ITTA/17/2015HC Telangana20 Mar 2015

M/S Queen'S Educational Society vs. Commr.of Income Tax

C.A. No.-005167-005167 - 2008Supreme Court16 Mar 2015

Bench: The Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital, May Be Gleaned From The Facts Of One Of Them, Namely, The Queen’S Educational Society Case. The Appellant Filed Its Return For Assessment Years 2000-2001 & 2001-2002 Showing A Net Surplus Of Rs.6,58,862/- & Rs.7,82,632/- Respectively. Since The Appellant Was Established With The Sole 2

Section 10Section 10(22)Section 260A

…uld not be a charitable purpose, but, if it is the latter, the charitable character of the purpose would not be lost. 9. Coming closer to the section at hand, in Aditanar Educational Institution v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, (1997) 224 ITR 310, this Court while construing the predecessor Section, namely, Section 10(22) of the Income Tax act, held: “The High Court has made an observation that any income which has a direct relation or incidental to the running of the institution as such would qualify for exemption. We may state that the language of 12 Page 13 JUDGMENT Section 10(…

M/S Queen'S Educational Society vs. Commr.of Income Tax

C.A. No.-005167-005167 - 2008Supreme Court16 Mar 2015

Bench: The Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital, May Be Gleaned From The Facts Of One Of Them, Namely, The Queen’S Educational Society Case. The Appellant Filed Its Return For Assessment Years 2000-2001 & 2001-2002 Showing A Net Surplus Of Rs.6,58,862/- & Rs.7,82,632/- Respectively. Since The Appellant Was Established With The Sole 2

Section 10Section 10(22)Section 260A

…uld not be a charitable purpose, but, if it is the latter, the charitable character of the purpose would not be lost. 9. Coming closer to the section at hand, in Aditanar Educational Institution v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, (1997) 224 ITR 310, this Court while construing the predecessor Section, namely, Section 10(22) of the Income Tax act, held: “The High Court has made an observation that any income which has a direct relation or incidental to the running of the institution as such would qualify for exemption. We may state that the language of 12 Page 13 JUDGMENT Section 10(…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S A S Kupparaju Brothers

ITA/1233/2006HC Karnataka14 Aug 2012

Bench: B.MANOHAR,K.SREEDHAR RAO

Section 260

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA No.1233/2006 C/W.ITA.1229/2006, 1230/2006, 1228/2006 & 1231/2006 ITA.NO.1233/2006 BETWEEN : 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, C.R.BUILDING QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE 2. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE 17(1) C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI.M.THIRUMALESH, ADV) AND : M/S.A.S.KUPPARAJU BROTHERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST ASKB CAMPUS, 1ST MAIN, 2 AGS COLONY, ANANDANAGAR, B…