CIT v. Institute of Banking

264 ITR 119High Court#14585 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2017.

Judgments citing CIT v. Institute of Banking

Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, Chennai vs. DDIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2010-11 & 2011-12 are allowed

ITA 1475/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan,AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.K.Ravi, JCIT,DR

Section 11Section 14Section 6

…eals) erred in not following the ratio laid down in the following decisions holding that depreciation is allowable in respect of assets, the cost of which has been already allowed as application of income u/s.11 in the past years CIT vs. Institute of Banking 264 ITR 119 (Bom) CIT vs Marketing Committee, Pipli 330 ITR 16( P& H) CIT vs Tiny Tots Educational Society 330 ITR 21 (P&H) CIT vs Vishwa Jagriti Mission 73 ITR 91 (Del) ITA No.1474 & 1475/16 :- 3 -: 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee claimed depreciation of an amount of `18,32,40,101/- and `18,85,58,300/- for the A.Y. 2010-11 and for A…

Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, Chennai vs. DDIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2010-11 & 2011-12 are allowed

ITA 1474/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan,AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.K.Ravi, JCIT,DR

Section 11Section 14Section 6

Raja Muthiah Chettiar Charitable and Educational Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 are allowed

ITA 1473/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan,AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.K.Ravi, JCIT,DR

Section 11Section 14Section 6

…eals) erred in not following the ratio laid down in the following decisions holding that depreciation is allowable in respect of assets, the cost of which has been already allowed as application of income u/s.11 in the past years CIT vs. Institute of Banking 264 ITR 119 (Bom) CIT vs Marketing Committee, Pipli 330 ITR 16( P& H) CIT vs Tiny Tots Educational Society 330 ITR 21 (P&H) CIT vs Vishwa Jagriti Mission 73 ITR 91 (Del) ITA Nos.1472 & 1473/Mds./16 :- 3 -: 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee claimed depreciation of an amount of `290,67,043/- and `2,90,67,044/- for the A.Y. 2011-12 and fo…

Raja Muthiah Chettiar Charitable and Educational Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 are allowed

ITA 1472/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan,AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.K.Ravi, JCIT,DR

Section 11Section 14Section 6

…eals) erred in not following the ratio laid down in the following decisions holding that depreciation is allowable in respect of assets, the cost of which has been already allowed as application of income u/s.11 in the past years CIT vs. Institute of Banking 264 ITR 119 (Bom) CIT vs Marketing Committee, Pipli 330 ITR 16( P& H) CIT vs Tiny Tots Educational Society 330 ITR 21 (P&H) CIT vs Vishwa Jagriti Mission 73 ITR 91 (Del) ITA Nos.1472 & 1473/Mds./16 :- 3 -: 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee claimed depreciation of an amount of `290,67,043/- and `2,90,67,044/- for the A.Y. 2011-12 and fo…

M/S Sevasadan Orphanage and Training Institute, Bangalore vs. DDIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 971/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Nov 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S Sevasadan Orphanage & Training Institute, #347, Sarjapur Road, Koramangala, Bangalore-560 034. . Appellant Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption), Circle – 17(2), Bangalore. . Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S Venkatesan, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Rukmani Attri, JCIT

Section 11(1)(a)

…arry forward of excess expenditure incurred is not permissible in the absence of a specific provision for the same is not correct and in this regard referred to the observations of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT V Institute of Banking (264 ITR 111) and the decision of the co- ordinate benches of this Tribunal in the cases of Baldwin Methodist Education Society in ITA No.523/Bang/2014 dt.31.3.2015 and St. ITA No.971/B/15 5 Francis Sales Educational and Charitable Trust in ITA No.365/Bang/2014 dt.10.7.2015 in support of the proposition put forth by him. 8. Per contra, the learned Depa…

The Jyothi Seva Society of Bangalore, Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2007-08 is allowed

ITA 312/BANG/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Sept 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Agarwala, JCIT (D.R)

Section 12ASection 143(3)

…t carry forward of excess expenditure incurred is not permissible in the absence of a specific provision for the same is not correct and in this regard referred to the observations of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT V Institute of Banking (264 ITR 111) and the decision of the co-ordinate benches of this Tribunal in the 5 cases of Baldwin Methodist Education Society in ITA No.523/Bang/2014 dt.31.3.2015 and St. Francis Sales Educational and Charitable Trust in ITA No.365/Bang/2014 dt.10.7.2015 in support of the proposition put forth by him. 5.2 Per contra, the learned Departmental Representative…

M/S Franciscan Service Society, Bangalore vs. Dyt, D, I, T, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 316/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jul 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, JCIT (D.R)

Section 12ASection 143(3)

…t carry forward of excess expenditure incurred is not permissible in the absence of a specific provision for the same is not correct and in this regard referred to the observations of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT V Institute of Banking (264 ITR 111) and the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the 5 case of Baldwin Methodist Education Society in ITA No.523/Bang/2014 dt.31.3.2015 in support of the proposition put forth by him. 5.2 Per contra, the learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that the Hon'ble High Court of Del…