Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11, Section 12A, Section 143(3), Section 11(1)(a), Section 11(1)(c), Section 11(2).

CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal

Q: How many judgments cite CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal?

204 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (211 ITR 293), spanning 2015 to 2026.

211 ITR 293High Court1995#444 most cited

What is CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal authority for?

A charitable trust can carry forward its excess expenditure from previous years and adjust it against the income of subsequent years, which qualifies as an application of income under Section 11. Additionally, voluntary contributions received for a specific purpose are treated as corpus funds and are not taxable.

204

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal · 211 ITR 293 · Section 11 Income Tax Act · Section 12A Income Tax Act · charitable trust carry forward losses · application of income · excess expenditure adjustment · voluntary contributions · specific purpose donations · corpus fund · capital receipt · Section 11(1)(a)

Sections most often in play

Section 11 Section 12A Section 143(3)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(c)Section 11(2)Section 250 Section 11 to 13 of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

carry forward of losses section 11(1)(a)section 11(1)application of income section 28 section 12a section 12 section 11 previous year section 13 person section 143(3)

Judgments citing CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S.Panchajanya Vidya Peeta Welfare Trust, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1787/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT (DR)

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 70

…ustment will have to be excluded from the income of the trust under s. 11(1)(a) of the Act. Our view is also supported by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shri Plot SwetamberMurtiPujak Jain Mandal (1994) 119 CTR (Guj) 144 : (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Guj). Accordingly, we answer question No. 3 in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department." The co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Baldwin Methodist Educational Society (supra), has held as under :- " We also find that 'A' bench of this Tribunal in the case of Academy of Liberal Education in ITA N…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S.Panchajanya Vidya Peeta Welfare Trust, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1786/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT (DR)

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 70

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S.Panchajanya Vidya Peeta Welfare Trust, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1785/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaand Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan D. George, CIT (DR)

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 70

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Coporation (Msrtc), Mumbai

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

ITA 5393/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Maharashtra State Road Income Tax (Exemptions)- Transport Corporation 2(1), (Msrtc), Room No.519, 5Th Floor, Vs. Maharashtra Vahatuk Piramal Chambers, Bhavan, Lalbaug, Dr. Anant Rao Nair Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 008 Mumbai - 400077 Pan: Aaacm 4699J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Maharashtra State Road Assistant Director Of Income Transport Corporation Tax (Exemption)-I(1), (Msrtc), Mumbai Maharashtra Vahatuk Vs. Bhavan, Dr. Anant Rao Nair Marg, Mumbai-400 008 Pan: Aaacm 4699J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena, D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner of M/s. Maharashtra State Road Income Tax (Exemptions)- Transport Corporation 2(1), (MSRTC), Room No.519, 5th Floor, Vs. Maharashtra Vahatuk Piramal Chambers, Bhavan, Lalbaug, Dr. Anant Rao Nair Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 008 Mumbai - 400077 PAN: AAACM 4699J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Maharashtra State Road Assistant Director of Income Transport Corporation Tax (Exemption)-I(1), (MSRTC),…

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Mumbai vs. ADIT (Exemption) -I (1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5327/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena, D.R

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12A

DCIT (Exemption), New Delhi vs. Subros Educational Society, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 6240/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Joginder Singh, Jm Ita No. 6240/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs Subros Educational Society, Tax(E), Circle-2(1), G-71, World Trade Centre, New Delhi Barakhamba Lane, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadts2161F Assessee By : Sh. Salil Agarwal, Adv. & Sh. Shailesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.11.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 21.09.2016 By Ld. Cit(A)-40, Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Agarwal, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 70

…it and carry forward of loss/ deficit is to be allowed and the several case laws are as under:- i) CIT vs. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation, 164 ITR 439 (Raj) 1987. 4 Subros Educational Society ii) CIT vs. Shri Plot Swetamaber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal, 211 ITR 293 (Guj) 1995. (in) CIT vs. Matrisewa Trust, 242 ITR 20 (Mad) 2000 (iv) Govindu Naicker Estate vs. ADIT, 248 ITR 110 (Bom) 2003. (v) CIT vs. Institute of Banking, 264ITR 110 (Bom) 2003. (vi) DIT vs. Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust, 197 Taxmann 170 (Delhi) 2011 vii) CIT vs. Gujarat Samaj, 349 ITR 559 (MP) 2012 3.3 After considering all the facts and cir…

DCIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Indo Italian Chambers of Commerce & Industry, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3373/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3373/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dy. Cit (Exemption)-1(1), Indo Italian Chambers Of Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Commerce & Industry, बनाम/ Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, 502, Bengal Chemicals Compound, Vs. Mumbai-400 012 Veer Savarkar Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400 025 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabct 1939 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Hemalatha ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. P. Acharya

For Appellant: Ms. HemalathaFor Respondent: Shri R. P. Acharya

…Act and that such adjustment will have to be excluded from the income of the Trust under section ll(l)(a) of the Act, Our view is also supported by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Cuj). Accordingly, we answer question No. 3 in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assesses and against the department." ii. Respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon. Jurisdictional High Court as above, the AO is directed to allow the carry forward of deficit in the succeeding years after due verification of facts. 5. Since the l…

ACIT (Exemption) - 1(1), Mumbai vs. Gujrat Research Society, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 5151/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit-1(1) Gujrat Research Society Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Dr. Madhuri Shah Vs. Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Campus, Ram Krishna Mumbai-400012. Mission Marg, Mumbai-400052. Pan No. Aaatb1718N Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Arju Garodia, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Rupam J. Shukla, Ar Date Of Hearing : 05/09/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2017

For Appellant: Mr. Rupam J. Shukla, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia, DR

Section 10Section 11Section 143(3)Section 32

…nts: i. CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS) (2003) 264 ITR 110 (Bom.) ii. CIT vs. The Trustees of Seth Merwarjee Framji Panday Charitable Fund (2003) 177 Taxation 19, 20 (Bom) iii. CIT vs. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Guj) iv. Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust and others vs. DIT (2011) 221 Taxation 250 (Del) v. CIT vs. Shri Gujarati Samaj (Regd.) (2011) 64 DTR 76 (MP). vi. CIT vs. Punjab Mandi Board (2014) 98 DTR 267 (P&H) Gujrat Research Society 5 vii. CIT vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Raisinghnagar (2016) 69 taxmann.com 425 (Raj). viii. CIT vs. Matriseva Trust…

ACIT-(E), Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S. Bhagwan Mahaveer Memorial Jain Trust, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1516/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Laliet Kumarasst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (E), Circle-1, Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs. Bhagwan Mahaveer Memorial Jain Trust, No.17, Millers Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru-560 052. … Respondent Pan:Aaatb 0895 L

For Appellant: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Muralidhar, H, Advocate

Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 28Section 35(1)(iv)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BENGALURU BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax (E), Circle-1, Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs. Bhagwan Mahaveer Memorial Jain Trust, No.17, Millers Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bengaluru-560 052. … Respondent PAN:AAATB 0895 L Appellant by : Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR) Respondent by : Shri Muralidhar, H, Advocate. Date of hearing : 09/10/2017 Date of pronouncement : 25/10/2017 O R D E R Per INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : This is an appeal filed by the revenue directed against the order of the Commissioner of…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. The Executive Board of the Methodist Church in India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2010-2011

ITA 5442/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of The Executive Board Of The Income-Tax (Exemptions)-2(1), Methodist Church In India, 510, 5Th Floor, 1, Prospect Chambers, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. Ground Floor, 313, D.N. Road, Mumbai - 400012 Flora Fountain, Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaatt5754E (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri V. Justin (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Shankar K. Jalgar(Ar) Date Of Hearing: 21/09/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 24/10/2017

For Appellant: Shri Shankar K. Jalgar(AR)For Respondent: Shri V. Justin (DR)

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner of The Executive Board of the Income-Tax (Exemptions)-2(1), Methodist Church in India, 510, 5th Floor, 1, Prospect Chambers, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. Ground Floor, 313, D.N. Road, Mumbai - 400012 Flora Fountain, Fort, Mumbai - 400001 PAN: AAATT5754E (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri V. Justin (DR) Assessee by : Shri Shankar K. Jalgar(AR) Date of Hearing: 21/09/2017 Date of Pronouncement: 24/10/2017 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM…

ITO (E) 2 (3), Mumbai vs. Seth Walchand Hirachand Loka Kalyan Trust, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4143/MUM/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2017AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4143/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ito-(E)-2(3), Seth Walchand Hirachand Loka- बनाम/ Room No. 513, Piramal Chambers, Kalyan Trust Lal Baug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 C/O., Pae Ltd. 69, Tardeo Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 034 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaats 0520 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri/ Smt. N. Hemalatha ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Harshad Agarwal सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 09.10.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 10.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 09.03.2017, Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. Whether On The Facts Of The Case & In Hue The Ld.Clt(A) Erred In Allowing The Carry Forward Of Deficit Of Rs.2,41,28,160/- & Allowing Set Off Against The Income Of The Subsequent Years.

For Appellant: Shri/ Smt. N. HemalathaFor Respondent: Shri Harshad Agarwal

Section 11Section 13Section 28

…1 of the Act and that such adjustment will have to be excluded from the income of the trust u/s. 11(l)(a) of the Act. Our view is also supported by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal [1995] 211 ITR 293. Accordingly, we answer questin No. 3 in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assesses and against the Department" 4 ITO-(E) vs. Seth Walchand Hirachand Loka-Kalyan Trust Thus, respectfully following the decision ofjurisdictionat High Court, we find that the grounds of appeal raised in the present appeal are squarely covered in assesse's favo…

DCIT (E)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Mandke Foundation, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4108/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4108/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dy. Cit (Exemptions)-2(1), Mandke Foundation बनाम/ Room No. 519, 5Th Floor, Rao Saheb Achutrao Patwardhan Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Marg, Four Bunglows, Vs. Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Andheri (W), Mumbai-400 053 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aatm 4557 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N. Hemalatha ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Jitendra Sanghavi सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 09.10.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 10.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 08.03.2017, Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. "Whether On The Facts Of The Case & In Law The Id.Cit(A) Erred In Aliening The Appeal Of The Assessee On Account Of Disallowing Depreciation On Fixed Assets Of Rs.60,92,65,396/- In Contravention Of The Decision Of Escorts

For Appellant: Shri N. HemalathaFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Sanghavi

Section 11Section 32

…Act and that such adjustment will have to be excluded from the income of the Trust under section 11(l)(a) of the Act. Our view is also supported by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Guj). Accordingly, we answer question No. 3 in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assesses and against the department." ii. Respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon. High Court as above, the AO is directed to allow the carry forward of deficit in the succeeding years after due verification of facts. 5. Since the ld. CIT(A) has f…

DCIT (E)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Santacruz Residents Association, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4103/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4103/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dy. Cit (Exemptions)-2(1), The Santacruz Residents Room No. 519, 5Th Floor, Association बनाम/ Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Bcj Hospital & Asha Parekh Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Research Centre, Corner Of S. V. Vs. Road, Tilak Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaats 8214 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri/Smt. N. Hemalatha ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 09.10.2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 10.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 14.03.2017, Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2012-13. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. "Whether On The Facts Of The Case & In Law The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee On Account Of Disallowing Depreciation On Fixed Assets Of Rs.73,31,8077- In Contravention Of The Decision Of Escorts Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri/Smt. N. HemalathaFor Respondent: None

Section 11Section 32

…Act and that such adjustment will have to be excluded from the income of the Trust under section 11(l)(a) of the Act. Our view is also supported by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v, Shri Plot Swetamber Muni Pujak Jain Mandal (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Guj). Accordingly, we answer question No. 3 in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the department." ii. Respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon. High Court as above, the AO is directed to allow the carry forward of deficit in the succeeding years after due verification of facts. 6. Since the learned CIT-A ha…

ITO (E) 2(3), Mumbai vs. Kutchi Kadva Ptidar Gnyati Trust Fund, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3308/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am Ito (E) 2 (3) Vs. Kutchi Kadva Patidar R.No.513, Gnyati Trust Fund Piramal Chamber, Patidar Wadi, Lbs Marg Lalbaug, Lower Parel Ghatkopar (W) Mumbai – 400 012 Mumbai – 400 086 Pan/Gir No. Aacts0647K Appellant) Respondent) ..

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…Act and that such adjustment will have to be excluded from the income of the Trust under section 11(1)(a) of the Act. Our view is also supported by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Guj). Accordingly, we answer question No. 3 in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the department. 5. Now coming to question No. 3, the point which arises for consideration is : whether excess of expenditure in the earlier years can be adjusted against the income of the subsequent year and whether such adjustment should b…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S B S & G Foundation, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for asst

ITA 884/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazthe Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemptions), Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S B S & G Foundation, 502, 2Nd Floor, 5Th ‘C’ Main, 5Th Cross, 2Nd Block, Hrbr Layout, Kalyannagar, Bangalore. . Respondent Pan – Aaatb6131D. Appellant By : Smt. Padmameenakshhi, Jcit Respondent By : Shri R.T Balasubramanyam, C.A Date Of Hearing : 28-9-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 4-10-2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. Padmameenakshhi, JCITFor Respondent: Shri R.T Balasubramanyam, C.A

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 143(3)

…amount to application of income of such later sear. The above is the position of law as held in the case of CIT v. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation [1987] 164 ITR 439/[1986] 29 Taxman 476 (Raj) and CIT Vs. Plot Sweatamber Murli Pujak Jain Mandal [1995[ 211 ITR 293 (Guj.). In CIT v, Institute ITA No.884/B/16 25 of Banking Personnel Selection [2003] 264 ITR 110/131 Taxman 386 (Bom.) it was held that in case of charitable trust whose income is exempt under s. 11, excess of expenditure in the earlier years can be adjusted against income at subsequent years and such adjustment Would tie application of income…

Deputy Director of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S.Franciscan Service Society, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2201/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raoincome-Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward-1, Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Shri S.Nambirajan, Addl.CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate

Section 11(1)(a)Section 12A

…l amount to application of income of such later year. The above is the position of law as held in the case of CIT v. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation [1987] 164 ITR 439/[1986] 29 Taxman 476 (Raj) and CIT v. Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal [1995] 211 ITR 293 (Guj.). In CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection [2003] 264 ITR 110/131 Taxman 386 (Bom.) it was held that in case of charitable trust whose income is Page 4 of 5 exempt under s. 11, excess of expenditure in the earlier years can be adjusted against income of subsequent years and such adjustment would be application of income for subseq…

ITO (E) 2(3), Mumbai vs. Mahavir Jain Charitakalyan Ratanashram, Mumbai

In the result appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1604/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am Ito (E) 2(3) Vs. Mahavir Jain Charitakalyan R.No.513, Piramal Chamber Ratanashram, Lalbaug, Parel 2/34, Minerva Building Mumbai – 400 012 19, Madhavdas Pasta Road Dadar (C.R.) Mumbai – 400 019 Pan/Gir No. Aaats7929L Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 143(3)Section 28

…Act and that such adjustment will have to be excluded from the income of the Trust under section n(i)(a) of the Act. Our view is also supported by the judgement of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal [1995] 211 ITR 293. Accordingly, we answer question No.3 in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department." On examining the above Bombay High Court case, it was held that income of the Trust should be computed u/s.11 on commercial principles after providing for allowance of normal depreciation and deduction thereof from gross income of…

Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S. the New Cambridge Educational Trust, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1388/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Singh, CIT (D.R)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Suresh, CA

Section 28

…t the income of a later year will amount to application of income of such later year. The above is the position of law as held in the case of CIT Vs. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation 164 ITR 439 (Raj) CIT Vs. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal 211 ITR 293 (Guj.). In CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection 264 ITR 110 (Bom), it was held that in case of charitable trust whose income is exempt under s. 11, excess of expenditure in the earlier years can be adjusted against income of subsequent years and such adjustment would be application of income for subsequent years and that depreciation…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. Sri. Taralabalu Bruhanmatt, Chitradurga

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 893/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri G. Kamalakar, Standing CounselFor Respondent: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CA

Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…l amount to application of income of such later year. The above is the position of law as held in the case of CIT v. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation [1987] 164 ITR 439/[1986] 29 Taxman 476 (Raj) and CIT v. Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal [1995] 211 ITR 293 (Guj.). In CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection [2003] 264 ITR 110/131 Taxman 386 (Bom.) it was held that in case of charitable trust whose income is exempt under s. 11, excess of expenditure in the earlier years can be adjusted against income of subsequent years and such adjustment would be application of income for subsequent years a…

ITO, Bangalore vs. St. Patrick'S Church, Bangalore

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 897/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Biju, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Sudheendra B.R., CA

Section 11(1)(a)

…tment will have to be excluded from the income of the trust under s. 11(1)(a) of the Act. Our view is also supported by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (1994) 119 CTR (Guj) 144 : (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Guj). Accordingly, we answer question No. 3 in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department.” 5.3.2 The co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Baldwin Methodist Educational Society (supra), has held as under :- “We also find that ‘A’ bench of this Tribunal in the case of Academy of Liberal Education in IT…