CIT v. Divine Light Mission

278 ITR 659High Court2005#8218 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also reported as

146 Taxmann 653

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12Section 11(5)Section 12A(a)Section 13(8)Section 2(15)Section 2(24)(iia)

Issues it is cited on

application of income for charitable purposessection 11(1)(d)corpus fundreal income theorysection 11(3)section 11(5)corpus donationsection 11(2)section 11(1)application of incomesection 12aaregular assessment

Judgments citing CIT v. Divine Light Mission

DUDHSAGAR RESEARCH AND DEMENT ASSOCIATION,MEHSANA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 203/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S N Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 13(8)Section 2(15)Section 250

…on precedent to their membership and as the price of admission to the privileges and benefits of the society or institution are given under a contract and are not voluntary. The Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Divine Light Mission [2005] 146 Taxman 653/278 ITR 659 (Delhi) held that membership fee and subscription amounts received by trust/society from its members cannot be characterized as voluntary contribution within meaning of expression ‘fund’ in Section 12. While holding so, High Court made the following observations: ‘Voluntary contribution is an act not coupled with compulsion. One may contribute or…

DUDHSAGAR RESEARCH AND DEMENT ASSOCIATION,MEHSANA vs. THE DY.CIT, CICLE-1, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 202/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S N Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 13(8)Section 2(15)Section 250

…on precedent to their membership and as the price of admission to the privileges and benefits of the society or institution are given under a contract and are not voluntary. The Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Divine Light Mission [2005] 146 Taxman 653/278 ITR 659 (Delhi) held that membership fee and subscription amounts received by trust/society from its members cannot be characterized as voluntary contribution within meaning of expression ‘fund’ in Section 12. While holding so, High Court made the following observations: ‘Voluntary contribution is an act not coupled with compulsion. One may contribute or…

COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-1(3) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2012-

ITA 955/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…foresaid cases, the entrance fee/ one-time membership fee received from the new members were treated as revenue receipt. The ld DR also placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Light Mission reported in 278 ITR 659 (Del), wherein it was held that voluntary donation received by the trust was treated as revenue receipt. The ld AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. W.I.A.A. Club Limited reported in 136 ITR 569 (Bom), wherein the life time membership fee received by the club was treated as capital receipt, be…

COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-1(3) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2012-

ITA 952/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…foresaid cases, the entrance fee/ one-time membership fee received from the new members were treated as revenue receipt. The ld DR also placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Light Mission reported in 278 ITR 659 (Del), wherein it was held that voluntary donation received by the trust was treated as revenue receipt. The ld AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. W.I.A.A. Club Limited reported in 136 ITR 569 (Bom), wherein the life time membership fee received by the club was treated as capital receipt, be…

SUBODH GUPTA,DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2012-

ITA 955/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…foresaid cases, the entrance fee/ one-time membership fee received from the new members were treated as revenue receipt. The ld DR also placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Light Mission reported in 278 ITR 659 (Del), wherein it was held that voluntary donation received by the trust was treated as revenue receipt. The ld AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. W.I.A.A. Club Limited reported in 136 ITR 569 (Bom), wherein the life time membership fee received by the club was treated as capital receipt, be…

NATIONAL CULTURE FUND,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD EXEMP

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

ITA 2722/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 11(2)Section 12A

…11 consist of fixed deposit interest of Rs.2,05,90,582/- and Rs.3,85,005/- being savings bank interest totaling Rs.2,09,75,587/-. The assessee relying upon the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Light Mission (2005) 278 ITR 659(Del.) submitted that the fixed deposit income is on account of provision of the Income Tax Act, which states that the funds are to be accumulated in the particular form as prescribed within the Income Tax Act. According to the assessee, these are mandatory assessee and not within the discretion of the assessee. Accordingly, it was submitted that…

NATIONAL CULTURE FUND,FIFTH FLOOR D-BLOCK vs. AO WARD-EXEMPATION-2(4), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2721/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 11(2)Section 12A

…11 consist of fixed deposit interest of Rs.2,05,90,582/- and Rs.3,85,005/- being savings bank interest totaling Rs.2,09,75,587/-. The assessee relying upon the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Light Mission (2005) 278 ITR 659(Del.) submitted that the fixed deposit income is on account of provision of the Income Tax Act, which states that the funds are to be accumulated in the particular form as prescribed within the Income Tax Act. According to the assessee, these are mandatory assessee and not within the discretion of the assessee. Accordingly, it was submitted that…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. NAVRATAN VIDHA MANDIR SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result appeal filed by the Department is dismissed and the C

ITA 201/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)Section 145(3)

…ssessee society treating the above amount as ‘’Revenue Receipts’ for the year under consideration.’’ Further the ld.DR relied upon the case laws to support his arguments in relations to the grounds of appeal raised hereinabove. 1. CIT vs Divine Light Mission 278 ITR 659 (Del.) 2. Surat City Gymkhiana vs DCIT 254 ITR 744 (Guj) 3. CIT vs Sir M. Visveswaraya Educational Trust 319 ITR 425((Karn) 4. Nachimuthu Industrial Association Vs. CIT 235 ITR 190 5. CIT vs VGP Foundation 262 ITR 187 (Mad.) 6. S.N. Namasivaym Chettiar vs CIT 38 ITR 579 (SC) 3.3 On the other hand, the ld.AR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A)…

NATIONAL CULTUE FUND ,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD- 2(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6349/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2013-14]

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 11(3)(c)Section 11(5)(iii)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…A) is an unreasonable order being challenged on facts & law. 2. Because the action of CIT(A) in upholding the assessment order & dismissing the appeal on mis- interpretation of the Jurisdictional Delhi High Court Judgment of CIT vs Divine Light Mission (2005) 278 ITR 659 (Delhi) is unwarranted & misapplication of jurisdiction.” 3. Brief facts of the case:- The assessee is a national fund created, by a notification of Ministry of Human Resources Development (Department of Culture) on 28/11/1996 and registered under section 12A vide order dated 06/01/1997. The return of income was filed on 30.03.2015 declaring N…

M/S. INDIAN SOCIETY FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 3280/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Indian Society For Vs. Ito, Technical Education, Ward-1(2), C/O. M/S. Rra Taxindia, New Delhi D-28, South Extension, Parti-I, New Delhi – 110 049. Pan: Aaati2760D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anima, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143Section 234Section 80G(5)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Indian Society for Vs. ITO, Technical Education, Ward-1(2), C/o. M/s. RRA Taxindia, New Delhi D-28, South Extension, Parti-I, New Delhi – 110 049. PAN: AAATI2760D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate; Revenue by: Ms. Anima, Sr. D.R.; Date of Hearing 14/07//2021 Date of pronouncement 13/09/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A.M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the or…

M/S CURRIMBHOY EBRAHIM KHOJA ORPHANAGE,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E)-1(2), MUMBAI

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2854/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode)

For Appellant: Shri Firoze Andhyarujina-Ld. Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay J.Sethi – Ld. DR
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 143(3)

…issue is squarely covered in assessee’s favor by the decision of this Tribunal in Jamshedji Tata Trust V/s Jt.DIT (E) (44 Taxmann.com 447) wherein coordinate bench drawing analogy from the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s Divine Light Mission (278 ITR 659) held that dividend income being exempt u/s 10(34) could not be brought to tax by applying the provisions of Sec. 11 to 13 of the Act. We also note that amendment to Sec.11 by way of insertion of clause (7) by Finance Act, 2014 to nullify the effect of this decision is applicable only with effect from 01/04/2015 and do not apply to this year. The…

SETH WALCHAND HIRACHAND MEMORIAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) II(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be Allowed

ITA 4852/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Vaibhavi PatelFor Respondent: Shri M. C. Omi Ningshan
Section 10(33)Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)

…erefore, it cannot be taxed twice. Once the income is exempt u/s 10 it would not required to be qualified u/s 11 of the Act. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Divine Light Mission. (278 ITR 659) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court dealt with an identical issue regarding agricultural income exempt u/s 10(5) of the Income Tax Act held that this income is not required to be considered at all even for the purpose of section 11 of the Income Tax Act. Thus the Ld. Senior Counsel has submitted that if exemption is available u/s 10 then s…

ASST CIT (E) I(1),MUMBAI vs. JAMSHETJEE TATA TRUST, MUMBAI

ITA 3807/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2016AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Dilip J. ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johri-DR
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11aSection 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 254(1)

…e is exempt u/s 10 it would not required 8 ITA/3807/M/15,AY.11-12-Jamshetjee Tata Trust to be qualified u/s 11 of the Act. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Divine Light Mission. (278 ITR 659) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court dealt with an identical issue regarding agricultural income exempt u/s 10(5) of the Income Tax Act held that this income is not required to be considered at all even for the purpose of section 11 of the Income Tax Act. Thus the Ld. Senior Counsel has submitted that if exemption is available u/s 10 then s…

KASTHURI SREENIVASAN TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1913/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jan 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. R. Bhavya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A.B. Koli, IRS, JCTI
Section 10(35)Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11ASection 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ons made before the lower authorities and argued the grounds raised in the appeal and relied on the decisionof Bombay Tribunal in the case of Jamsetji Tata Trust vs. JCIT 161 TTJ 742 and Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Divine Light Mission 278 ITR 659. Further, argued that the dividend income being exempted u/s.10(35) of the Act and cannot be part of the application of the income for the purpose of working out computation u/sec 11 of the Act. Exempt income cannot be considered for the calculation of 85% application of funds as per provisions of the Act and further ld. Authorised Representat…