What is CIT v. Market Committee, Pipli authority for?

A charitable trust can claim depreciation on assets when computing the income applied for charitable or religious purposes under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, for assessment years prior to the introduction of Section 11(6). The restriction on claiming depreciation, as introduced by Section 11(6), is prospective from AY 2015-16.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Market Committee, Pipli?

113 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Market Committee, Pipli (330 ITR 16), spanning 2013 to 2024.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Market Committee, Pipli come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10(23C)(iv), Section 11, Section 11(1)(a), Section 11(2), Section 12A, Section 13.

CIT v. Market Committee, Pipli (330 ITR 16)

ADIT (E), New Delhi vs. Fortune Society for Development and Promotion of International Business, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 2

ITA 2698/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiadit(E), Vs. Fortune Society For Tc-Ii, New Delhi Development & Promotion Of International Business, G-4, Community Centre, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi Pan:Aaatf0849L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anshu Prakash, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Satish Khosla, Adv

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12Section 143Section 2

…Madhyapradesh High Court in CIT Vs. Raipur Pallottine Society (180 ITR 579); Gujarath High Court in CIT Vs. Sheth Manilal rachhnoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust 198 ITR 598 = 2003-TIOL-944-HC-AHM-IT; Punjab and Haryana High court in CIT Vs. Market Committee Pipli (330 ITR 16) and CIT Vs. Tiny Tots Education Society (330 ITR 21) = 2010-TIOL-550-HC-P&H-IT; Page 16 of 18 Madhyapradesh High Court in CIT Vs. Devi Sakuntala Tharal Charitable Foundation (358 ITR 452) and the Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs. Silluguri Regulated Market Committee (366 ITR 51). In addition, the Delhi High Court in DIT Vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission…

Rajah Sir Annamalai Chettiar Memorial Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT (Exemptions) 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1635/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1633 & 1634/Mds/2017 'नधा#रण वष# /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms.Ann Mary Baby, JCIT

Section 11

…ers of St.Anne (146 ITR 28); Madhyapradesh High Court in CIT v. Raipur Pallottine Society (180 ITR 579); Gujarath High Court in CIT Vs. Sheth Manilal rachhnoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust 198 ITR 598; Punjab and Haryana High court in CIT v. Market Committee Pipli (330 ITR 16) and CIT v. Tiny Tots Education Society (330 ITR 21); Madhyapradesh High Court in CIT v. Devi Sakuntala Tharal Charitable Foundation (358 ITR 452) and the Calcutta High Court in IT v. Silluguri Regulated Market committee (366 ITR 51). In addition, the Delhi High Court in DIT v. Vishwa Jagriti Mission 262 CTR 558 and the Karnnataka High Court in DI…

Rani Meyyammai Achi of Chettinad Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT (Exemptions) 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1634/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1633 & 1634/Mds/2017 'नधा#रण वष# /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms.Ann Mary Baby, JCIT

Section 11

…ers of St.Anne (146 ITR 28); Madhyapradesh High Court in CIT v. Raipur Pallottine Society (180 ITR 579); Gujarath High Court in CIT Vs. Sheth Manilal rachhnoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust 198 ITR 598; Punjab and Haryana High court in CIT v. Market Committee Pipli (330 ITR 16) and CIT v. Tiny Tots Education Society (330 ITR 21); Madhyapradesh High Court in CIT v. Devi Sakuntala Tharal Charitable Foundation (358 ITR 452) and the Calcutta High Court in IT v. Silluguri Regulated Market committee (366 ITR 51). In addition, the Delhi High Court in DIT v. Vishwa Jagriti Mission 262 CTR 558 and the Karnnataka High Court in DI…

Rani Meyyammai Achi of Chettinad Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT (Exemptions) 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1633/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1633 & 1634/Mds/2017 'नधा#रण वष# /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms.Ann Mary Baby, JCIT

Section 11

…ers of St.Anne (146 ITR 28); Madhyapradesh High Court in CIT v. Raipur Pallottine Society (180 ITR 579); Gujarath High Court in CIT Vs. Sheth Manilal rachhnoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust 198 ITR 598; Punjab and Haryana High court in CIT v. Market Committee Pipli (330 ITR 16) and CIT v. Tiny Tots Education Society (330 ITR 21); Madhyapradesh High Court in CIT v. Devi Sakuntala Tharal Charitable Foundation (358 ITR 452) and the Calcutta High Court in IT v. Silluguri Regulated Market committee (366 ITR 51). In addition, the Delhi High Court in DIT v. Vishwa Jagriti Mission 262 CTR 558 and the Karnnataka High Court in DI…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S G M Education Trust, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of revenue and C

ITA 890/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 May 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Respondent: Shri G. Kamaladhar, D.R

…ch income. It was so held by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Society of Sisters of St. Anne 146 ITR 28 (Kar). It was held in CIT vs. Tiny Tots Education Society (2011) 330 ITR 21 (P&H) , following CIT vs. Market Committee, Pipli (2011) 330 ITR 16 (P&H) : (2011) 238 CTR (P&H) 103 that depreciation can be claimed by a charitable institution in determining percentage of funds applied for the purpose of charitable objects. Claim for depreciation will not amount to double benefit. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. 199 ITR 43 (SC) have been referred to and dis…

ACIT(E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Padmshree Dr D.Y. Patil University, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2035/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri B.C.S.NaikFor Respondent: Shri Reepal G Traishawala

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 32

…be sustained. He further submits that similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Siliguri Regulated Market Committee [366 ITR 51] and Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Market Committee Pipli [330 ITR 16] by distinguishing the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. Vs. Union of India [119 ITR 43] which was relied on by the Assessing Officer. 4. The Ld. DR placed reliance on the orders of the Assessing Officer. 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the decision of the Ju…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Chalasani Education Trust, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 887/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G. Kamaladhar, D.RFor Respondent: Dr.N.Suresh, C.A

Section 11(1)(a)

…ch income. It was so held by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Society of Sisters of St. Anne 146 ITR 28 (Kar). It was held in CIT vs. Tiny Tots Education Society (2011) 330 ITR 21 (P&H) , following CIT vs. Market Committee, Pipli (2011) 330 ITR 16 (P&H) : (2011) 238 CTR (P&H) 103 that depreciation can be claimed by a charitable institution in determining percentage of funds applied for the purpose of charitable objects. Claim for depreciation will not amount to double benefit. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. 199 ITR 43 (SC) have been referred to and dis…

The Christia Literature Society, Chennai vs. JCIT (OSD), Chennai

In the result, I set aside the orders of the lower authorities

ITA 2818/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

For Appellant: Smt. B. Jaisheila, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. B. Sahadevan, IRS, JCIT

Section 11

…ome could not be allowed. As against this Hon’ble High Courts of Madhya Pradesh, Karnakata, Punjab & Haryana and Bombay in CIT vs. Raipur Pallattine Society 180 ITR 579, CIT vs. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne 146 ITR 28, CIT vs. Market Committee, Pipli 330 ITR 16 and CIT vs. Institute of Banking 264 ITR 110, respectively, had held that such a claim was allowable. Hon’ble P & H High Court had held so, after considering the Apex Court judgment in the case of Escorts Ltd and Another vs. Union of India and others 199 ITR 43 relied on by the ld. Departmental Representative. Further, I find that Hon’ble Apex C…

ITO (E) 2(3), Mumbai vs. Sathya Sai Trust, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6567/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…i Sakuntala Tharal Charitable Foundation (2013) 358 ITR452 (MP) (iii) CIT vs. Siliguri Regulated Market Committee (2014) 366 ITR 51 (Cal) (iv) Director of Income Tax v. Vishwa Jagriti Mission (2012) 73 DTR 195 (Del.) (v) CIT vs. Market Committee, Pipli (2011) 330 ITR 16 (Punjab & Haryana) (vi) CIT vs. Tiny Tots Educational Society (2011) 330 ITR 21 (Punjab & Haryana) 7. She further submitted that the decision in the case of Escort Limited (supra) relied upon by the AO has been discussed and distinguished in the judicial pronouncement mentioned at serial no. iv to vi above. She further submitted that rule of consi…

ITO, Bangalore vs. Shanthi Charitable Trust, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 896/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G. Kamaladhar, DRFor Respondent: Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)

…ch income. It was so held by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Society of Sisters of St. Anne 146 ITR 28 (Kar). It was held in CIT vs. Tiny Tots Education Society (2011) 330 ITR 21 (P&H) , following CIT vs. Market Committee, Pipli (2011) 330 ITR 16 (P&H) : (2011) 238 CTR (P&H) 103 that depreciation can be claimed by a charitable institution in determining percentage of funds applied for the purpose of charitable objects. Claim for depreciation will not amount to double benefit. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. 199 ITR 43 (SC) have been referred to and dis…

ADIT (E), New Delhi vs. Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2809/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiadit(E), Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust, Inv Circle-Ii, 105, Rakesh Deep Building, 11, Vs. New Delhi Commercial Complex, Gulmohar Enclave, New Delhi Pan:Aaatr0568G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: None

Section 11Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 143(3)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ADIT(E), Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust, Inv Circle-II, 105, Rakesh Deep Building, 11, Vs. New Delhi Commercial Complex, Gulmohar Enclave, New Delhi PAN:AAATR0568G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by: None Date of Hearing 03/04/2017 Date of pronouncement 03/04/2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is preferred by revenue against the order of the ld CIT(A)-XXI, New Delhi raising following two grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and…

ACIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Mandke Foundation, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2551/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumar: (A.Y : 2010-11) Acit (E) 2(1) Vs. M/S Mandke Foundation R.No.510, Piramal Chambers Rao Saheb Achut Rao Lalbaug Parel Patwardhan Marg Mumbai – 400 012 Four Bunglow Andheri (West) Mumbai - 400 053 Pan : Aaatm4557G (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shrikant Namdeo प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Jitendra Sanghvi सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/12/2016 घोषणा की तारीख Date Of Pronouncement : 07/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N.Prasad (J.M.) : This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-1, Mumbai Dated 05.02.2015 For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds : "1. On The Facts Of The Case & In Law The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee On Account Of Disallowing

For Appellant: Shrikant NamdeoFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi

Section 1Section 11Section 143(3)Section 32

…ombay High Court:- 1. ITO vs. Bai Kabibai & Hansraj Moraji Charity Trust, ITA No.5842/M/2011. 2. DIT vs. Framjee Cawasjee Institute- 49 taxmann.com 22 (Bombay HC) 3. ACIT vs. Shri Adichunchanaagiri Shikshana Trust, 19 ITR (T) 828 4. CIT vs. Market Committee – 330 ITR 16 (P&H, HC) For the reason that the decision of the CIT(Appeals) is based on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, no interference is called for and accordingly, Revenue fails on this issue. 5. The second issue raised by the Revenue is with regard to the decision of the CIT(Appeals) in directing the Assessing Officer to allow carry forward…

ITO (E) 2(2), Mumbai vs. Parmeshwaridevi Gordhandas Garodia Charitable Trust, Mumbai

ITA 2661/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.2661/Mum/2015,"नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2010-11 Ito (E)- 2(2), Parmeshwaridevi Gordhandas Garodia Room No. 4502, 5Th Floor, बनाम Charitable Trust, 153, Garodia Nagar, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai-400077 Vs. Parel, Mumbai-4000012. Pan: Aaatp0083C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Anu Krishna Aggarwal (Dr) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Rahul K. Hakani (Ar)

For Appellant: Shri Rahul K. Hakani (AR)For Respondent: Shri Anu Krishna Aggarwal (DR)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 32

…ition of the assets themselves were allowable as deduction, even though the expenditure represented capital expenditure. Both these judgments have been considered by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in a recent decision in CIT vs Market Committee, Pipli (2011) 330 ITR 16 (P & H). In this case the assessee was a trust registered under the Income Tax Act as a charitable trust. The Assessing Officer disallowed depreciation on the assets on the ground that since the income was exempt, allowing depreciation to ascertain whether the required percentage of funds were applied for the purposes of the trust would amount to…

Institute of Management and Advance Global Excellence (Image), Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar

ITA 225/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack10 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Me, Ld A.R. Of The Assessee Filed Assessment Orders For The Assessment Years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-2010 Passed

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 32

…Asse ss ment Y ear :20 11- 201 2 3. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of lower authorities and materials available on record. Brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee does not have a building of its own, that it had stated to have incurred capital expenditure towards improvement of the building taken on lease from one Shri Somnath Nayak and Shjri R.S.Meher . Therefore, invoking the Explanation 1 to Section 32, he held that the assessee is not entitled to claim depreciation on leased assets and added Rs.7,68,058/- to the income of the assessee.…

M/S. Manjeet Kaur Memorial Premier Institute of Education, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1824/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv., Sh. AshishFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 234ASection 24

…and the income' earned from me property would be available for being utilised for charitable purposes." 15.3 I further note that Depreciation has been held to be an application of income in following judgments: I. CIT Vs Tiny Tots Education Society [2011] 330 ITR 16 (P&H) II. DIT Vs Vishwa Jagriti Mission [2013] 83 DTR 47 (Del). III. CIT Vs Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhawan Trust [1992] 198 ITR 598 (Guj). IV. CIT Vs Bharuka Public Welfare Trust [1999] 240 ITR 513 (Cal) V. CIT Vs Institute of Banking Personnel Selection [2003] 264 ITR 110 (Bom.) 15.4 Further, expenditure incurred on Eye check up,…

M/S. Manjit Kaur Memorial Premier Institute of Education, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2025/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv., Sh. AshishFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 234ASection 24

…and the income' earned from me property would be available for being utilised for charitable purposes." 15.3 I further note that Depreciation has been held to be an application of income in following judgments: I. CIT Vs Tiny Tots Education Society [2011] 330 ITR 16 (P&H) II. DIT Vs Vishwa Jagriti Mission [2013] 83 DTR 47 (Del). III. CIT Vs Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhawan Trust [1992] 198 ITR 598 (Guj). IV. CIT Vs Bharuka Public Welfare Trust [1999] 240 ITR 513 (Cal) V. CIT Vs Institute of Banking Personnel Selection [2003] 264 ITR 110 (Bom.) 15.4 Further, expenditure incurred on Eye check up,…

Diocese of Gulbarga, Gulbarga vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Gulbarga

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1662/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George Km/S. Diocese Of Gulbarga, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bishops House, Mother Of Divine Circle-1, Grace, Church Road, Gulbarga (Kalaburagi). Gulbarga– 585103. Pan : Aabtb0999C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Ms. S. Praveena, Addl. CIT

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

…such income. It was so held by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Society of Sisters of St. Anne 146 ITR 28 (Kar). It was held in CIT vs. Tiny Tots Education Society (2011) 330 ITR 21 (P&H), following CIT vs.Market Committee, Pipli (2011) 330 ITR 16 (P&H) : (2011) 238 CTR (P&H) 103 that depreciation can be claimed by a charitable institution in determining percentage of funds applied for the purpose of charitable objects. Claim for depreciation will not amount to double benefit. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. 199 ITR 43 (SC) have been referred to and dis…

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2129/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V.Sreekanth, JCIT

Section 11Section 12ASection 32Section 42

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ीएन.आर.एस. गणेशन,"या"यकसद"य एवं "ी "ड.एस. सु"दर "संह,लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2129/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s.Raja Muthiah Chettiar v. The Deputy Director of Income Tax Charitable and Educational Trust, (Exemptions), Rani Seethai Hall, V Floor, Chennai Circle, 603, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 006. PAN: AAATR 3208 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

DDIT (E) I(1), Mumbai vs. M.L. Charitable Trust, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3653/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 11

…her it amounts to double deduction considered both the decisions i.e. the Institute of Banking from Hon'ble Bombay High Court and Escorts Ltd. from Hon'ble Apex Court and also the decision from Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Market Committee Pipli 330 ITR 16 (P & H) and following the aforementioned decision decided the issue against the Revenue. It is worth mentioning that the decision from Hon'ble Bombay High Court is a later decision considering another decision in DIT(E) vs Framjee Cawasjee Institute (1993) 109 CTR 463 and also another decision from Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Shri Plot Swetamber…

DDIT (E) I(1), Mumbai vs. M.L. Charitable Trust, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3652/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 11

…her it amounts to double deduction considered both the decisions i.e. the Institute of Banking from Hon'ble Bombay High Court and Escorts Ltd. from Hon'ble Apex Court and also the decision from Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Market Committee Pipli 330 ITR 16 (P & H) and following the aforementioned decision decided the issue against the Revenue. It is worth mentioning that the decision from Hon'ble Bombay High Court is a later decision considering another decision in DIT(E) vs Framjee Cawasjee Institute (1993) 109 CTR 463 and also another decision from Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Shri Plot Swetamber…

CIT v. Market Committee, Pipli

What is CIT v. Market Committee, Pipli authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Market Committee, Pipli

ADIT (E), New Delhi vs. Fortune Society for Development and Promotion of International Business, New Delhi

Rajah Sir Annamalai Chettiar Memorial Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT (Exemptions) 1, Chennai

Rani Meyyammai Achi of Chettinad Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT (Exemptions) 1, Chennai

Rani Meyyammai Achi of Chettinad Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT (Exemptions) 1, Chennai

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S G M Education Trust, Bangalore

ACIT(E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Padmshree Dr D.Y. Patil University, Navi Mumbai

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Chalasani Education Trust, Bangalore

The Christia Literature Society, Chennai vs. JCIT (OSD), Chennai

ITO (E) 2(3), Mumbai vs. Sathya Sai Trust, Mumbai

ITO, Bangalore vs. Shanthi Charitable Trust, Bangalore

ADIT (E), New Delhi vs. Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust, New Delhi

ACIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Mandke Foundation, Mumbai

ITO (E) 2(2), Mumbai vs. Parmeshwaridevi Gordhandas Garodia Charitable Trust, Mumbai

Institute of Management and Advance Global Excellence (Image), Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar

M/S. Manjeet Kaur Memorial Premier Institute of Education, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

M/S. Manjit Kaur Memorial Premier Institute of Education, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

Diocese of Gulbarga, Gulbarga vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Gulbarga

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

DDIT (E) I(1), Mumbai vs. M.L. Charitable Trust, Mumbai

DDIT (E) I(1), Mumbai vs. M.L. Charitable Trust, Mumbai