What is CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne authority for?

Depreciation claimed by a charitable trust on its assets is an allowable application of income for computing exemption under Section 11, and this does not constitute a double deduction.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne?

195 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne (146 ITR 28), spanning 2012 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11, Section 13(2), Section 13(3), Section 143(3), Section 10, Section 10(23C)(iiiad).

CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne (146 ITR 28)

M.P. Santhosh Kumar, ITO, Chennai vs. Greenpeace Environment Trust, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 406/CHNY/2025[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 406/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Greenpeace Environment Trust, Exemptions, Ward-1, Vs. New No.49, Old No.23, Chennai. Ellaiamman Colony, Gopalapuram, Chennai-600 086. [Pan:Aaatg-3538-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. Kumar Chandan, Jcit. प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, F.C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am :

For Appellant: Mr. Kumar Chandan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri. Y.Sridhar, F.C.A

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)(c)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…ITR (Trib)-OL 166 (Chennai) - CIT vs. Tiny Tots Education Society 330 ITR 21 (Punjab and Haryana). The High Court held that allowing depreciation and capital expenses as application does not amount to double deduction. - CIT vs. Society of Sisters of St.Anne (146 ITR 28 – Karnataka) - CIT vs. Sheth Manilala Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust (198 ITR 598 – Gujarat) - CIT vs. Raipur Pallottine Society (180 ITR 579 – Madhya Pradesh) - CIT vs. Leelavathi Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust (54 Taxmann.com 247 – Bombay V. EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 7. We request you to direct the learned AO to allow exemption under section 1…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S. Soma Enterprises Ltd

ITTA/209/2010HC Telangana16 Jul 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

M/S. Barrows Blue Bells School, Baharaich vs. The I.T.O. (E), Lucknow

Accordingly, the same are being dismissed as having become academic in nature

ITA 362/LKW/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 148

…er charitable Trust on which no cost was borne by the assessee Trust. Other Hon'ble High Courts which have also taken the view that depreciation is deductible are the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne(1984) 146 ITR 28 and the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Raipur Pallottine Society (1989) 180 ITR 579. In CIT Vs. Seth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust(1992) 105 CTR (Guj.) 303 it was held that depreciation should be allowed while computing such income under section 11(i) (a). The Contention of the appellant is further supported by…

M/S. Barrows Blue Bells School, Baharaich vs. The I.T.O. (E), Lucknow

Accordingly, the same are being dismissed as having become academic in nature

ITA 361/LKW/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 148

…er charitable Trust on which no cost was borne by the assessee Trust. Other Hon'ble High Courts which have also taken the view that depreciation is deductible are the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne(1984) 146 ITR 28 and the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Raipur Pallottine Society (1989) 180 ITR 579. In CIT Vs. Seth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust(1992) 105 CTR (Guj.) 303 it was held that depreciation should be allowed while computing such income under section 11(i) (a). The Contention of the appellant is further supported by…

Shri Digamber Jain Atikshaya Keshtra, Padampua vs. ITO Exemption Ward 1, Kailash Heights

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 424/JPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev sogani (C.A)&For Respondent: Ms. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 11(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 24Section 253(3)

…uncements wherein Hon’ble courts have held that claim of depreciation by a charitable trust is allowed as deduction and does not amount to taking of double benefit.  CIT vs. Market Committee, Pipli [330 ITR 60] (P&H)  CIT vs. Society of Sisters of St. Anne [146 ITR 28] (Kar)  CIT vs. Bhoruka Public Charitable Trust [240 ITR 513] (Cal)  CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS) [131 Taxman 386](Bom)  CIT vs. ShethManilalRancchoddasVishramBhawan Trust ]198 ITR 598] (Guj)  CIT vs. Raipur Pallottine Society [180 ITR 579] (MP)  CIT vs. Ganga Charity Trust Fund [162 ITR 612] (Guj)  CIT vs. Indian…

Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda Vidyalaya Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT (Exemptions) III, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs 2010-11 to

ITA 1353/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1350-1353/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 M/S.Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda- V. The Dy. Director Of Income- Vidyalaya Trust, Tax (Exemptions)-Iii, U-6, Seventh Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 040. [Pan: Aaatj 0208 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 1Section 11(2)Section 11(6)

…as an expenditure allowable while computing income from property held under Trust on the basis of certain judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Society of the Sisters Anne reported in [1984] 146 ITR 28 (Kar.). For the AY 2011-12, the assessee had also claimed depreciation on fixed assets pertains to AYs 2001-02 to 2009-10 aggregating to Rs.2,83,31,198/- by way of revised statement of total income. 4. The AO, however, was not convinced with the explanation of the assessee and also not satisfied with revised statement of total income filed by…

Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda Vidyalaya Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT (Exemptions) III, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs 2010-11 to

ITA 1352/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1350-1353/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 M/S.Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda- V. The Dy. Director Of Income- Vidyalaya Trust, Tax (Exemptions)-Iii, U-6, Seventh Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 040. [Pan: Aaatj 0208 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 1Section 11(2)Section 11(6)

…as an expenditure allowable while computing income from property held under Trust on the basis of certain judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Society of the Sisters Anne reported in [1984] 146 ITR 28 (Kar.). For the AY 2011-12, the assessee had also claimed depreciation on fixed assets pertains to AYs 2001-02 to 2009-10 aggregating to Rs.2,83,31,198/- by way of revised statement of total income. 4. The AO, however, was not convinced with the explanation of the assessee and also not satisfied with revised statement of total income filed by…

Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda Vidyalaya Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT (Exemptions) III, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs 2010-11 to

ITA 1351/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1350-1353/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 M/S.Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda- V. The Dy. Director Of Income- Vidyalaya Trust, Tax (Exemptions)-Iii, U-6, Seventh Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 040. [Pan: Aaatj 0208 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 1Section 11(2)Section 11(6)

…as an expenditure allowable while computing income from property held under Trust on the basis of certain judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Society of the Sisters Anne reported in [1984] 146 ITR 28 (Kar.). For the AY 2011-12, the assessee had also claimed depreciation on fixed assets pertains to AYs 2001-02 to 2009-10 aggregating to Rs.2,83,31,198/- by way of revised statement of total income. 4. The AO, however, was not convinced with the explanation of the assessee and also not satisfied with revised statement of total income filed by…

Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda Vidyalaya Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT (Exemptions) III, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs 2010-11 to

ITA 1350/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1350-1353/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 M/S.Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda- V. The Dy. Director Of Income- Vidyalaya Trust, Tax (Exemptions)-Iii, U-6, Seventh Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai. Chennai-600 040. [Pan: Aaatj 0208 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr.P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 1Section 11(2)Section 11(6)

…as an expenditure allowable while computing income from property held under Trust on the basis of certain judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Society of the Sisters Anne reported in [1984] 146 ITR 28 (Kar.). For the AY 2011-12, the assessee had also claimed depreciation on fixed assets pertains to AYs 2001-02 to 2009-10 aggregating to Rs.2,83,31,198/- by way of revised statement of total income. 4. The AO, however, was not convinced with the explanation of the assessee and also not satisfied with revised statement of total income filed by…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Kolkata vs. Integrated Education & Research Centre for Engineering & Man

The appeal stands dismissed

ITAT/276/2017HC Calcutta28 Jul 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak Date : 28Th July, 2022 Appearance : Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, Adv. ….For Appellant Mr. Dwip Raj Basu, Adv. …For Respondent The Court :- This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St June, 2016, Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “C” Bench, Kolkata In Ita No. 620/Kol/2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration. I) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Tribunal Erred In Law In Not Considering That Allowing Depreciation In Respect Of A Depreciable Asset For Which The Assessee

Section 11(6)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

…n is allowable under Section 32 on the same assets. The assessee submitted the reply to the show cause notice by placing reliance on several decisions of various High Courts and in particular, the decision in the case of CIT Vs. SOCIETY OF SISTERS OF ANNE.; 146 ITR 28 (Kar.); CIT Vs. TINY TOTS EDUCATION SOCIETY, (2011) 330 ITR 21 (P&H), which followed the decision in CIT Vs. MARKET COMMITTEE, PIPLI (2011) 330 ITR 16 (P&H), as also the decision of this Court in JYOTIRMAI CLUB, ITA No. 647 of 2004 dated 10th November, 2014. Reliance was also placed on the decision in the case of CIT Vs. RCAO BAHADUR CALAVALA CUNN…

M/S. Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle -1, Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 948/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

M/S. Udupi Nirmithi Kedra, Udupi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle - 1, Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 947/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Circle-1, Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2089/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2088/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2087/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mangaluru

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2086/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

M/S. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions) Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 1962/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…ITA No.947&948 /Bang/2019, ITA 1962/Bang/2018 & ITA Nos.2086 to 2089/Bang/2018 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi & Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Manguluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Rajathadri DC Office complex ACIT (Exemptions) Endpoint, Manipal Circle-1 Vs. Udupi 576 104 Mangaluru PAN NO :AAATU1950D ASSESSEE RESPONDENT AssessmentYear:2016-17 M/s. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra Deputy Commissioner of Udupi 576 104 Income-tax (Exemptions) Vs…

M/S. R N Shetty Trust, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 428/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kulkarni, Advocate

Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 427 & 428/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. R.N. Shetty Trust, The Assistant No. 14, 7th Floor, Commissioner of No. 37, Naveen Complex, Income Tax, M G Road, Circle – 2 (3), Bangalore – 560 001. Vs. Bangalore. PAN: AAATR2319D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ashok Kulkarni, Advocate : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT Revenue by DR Date of Hearing : 16-03-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28-03-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Presen…

M/S. R N Shetty Trust, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 427/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kulkarni, Advocate

Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 427 & 428/Bang/2020 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 M/s. R.N. Shetty Trust, The Assistant No. 14, 7th Floor, Commissioner of No. 37, Naveen Complex, Income Tax, M G Road, Circle – 2 (3), Bangalore – 560 001. Vs. Bangalore. PAN: AAATR2319D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ashok Kulkarni, Advocate : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT Revenue by DR Date of Hearing : 16-03-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 28-03-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Presen…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle-1, Bengaluru vs. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals filed by revenue are dismissed

ITA 578/BANG/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…of section 11(1) has to be computed in normal commercial manner, the amount of depreciation debited in the books is deductible while computing such income. It was so held by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Society of Sisters of St. Anne 146 ITR 28 (Kar). It was held in CIT v. Tiny Tots Education Society Page 9 of 10 ITA Nos. 577 & 578/Bang/2021 [2011] 330 ITR 21 (P&H), following CIT v. 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 charitab…

CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne

What is CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne

M.P. Santhosh Kumar, ITO, Chennai vs. Greenpeace Environment Trust, Chennai

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S. Soma Enterprises Ltd

M/S. Barrows Blue Bells School, Baharaich vs. The I.T.O. (E), Lucknow

M/S. Barrows Blue Bells School, Baharaich vs. The I.T.O. (E), Lucknow

Shri Digamber Jain Atikshaya Keshtra, Padampua vs. ITO Exemption Ward 1, Kailash Heights

Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda Vidyalaya Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT (Exemptions) III, Chennai

Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda Vidyalaya Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT (Exemptions) III, Chennai

Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda Vidyalaya Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT (Exemptions) III, Chennai

Jaigopal Garodia Vivekananda Vidyalaya Trust, Chennai vs. DDIT (Exemptions) III, Chennai

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Kolkata vs. Integrated Education & Research Centre for Engineering & Man

M/S. Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle -1, Mangaluru

M/S. Udupi Nirmithi Kedra, Udupi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle - 1, Mangaluru

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Circle-1, Mangaluru

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mangaluru

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mangaluru

Dakshina Kannada Nirmithi Kendra, Mangaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Mangaluru

M/S. Udupi Nirmithi Kendra, Udupi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions) Circle-1, Mangalore

M/S. R N Shetty Trust, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

M/S. R N Shetty Trust, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle-1, Bengaluru vs. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, Bengaluru