CIT v. Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust

212 ITR 456High Court1995#4999 most cited

What is CIT v. Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust authority for?

The High Court decision in CIT v. Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust (1995) 212 ITR 456 (Ker) is cited in support of the proposition that a trust may not be eligible for exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) if it derives income from business activities, such as running a theatre.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust · 212 ITR 456 · section 10(23C)(iiiad) · charitable trust exemption · business income of trust · Geethangali Theatre income · educational purposes · trust running business · exemption denial · exemption eligibility

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 10(22A)Section 11Section 119Section 12Section 12AASection 13Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 12ab(4)(ii)section 12aa(1)(b)(ii)section 10(22)section 12aa(1)(b)section 12aa(1)section 13(1)(d)section 10(23c)(iiiad)section 12aa(3)section 12ab(4)section 11(5)protective assessmentcancellation of registration

Judgments citing CIT v. Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust

M/S. Sun Steel Industries (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1638/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2007-08

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 256(2)Section 263

…der which requires to be taken as the date of framing of the impugned assessment. I notice in this backdrop that hon'ble Kerala high court’s ITA No.1638/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2007-08 M/s Sun Steel Industries P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Cir-3(1), Kol. Page 2 decision in [1995] 212 ITR 456 CIT vs. Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust holds that it is the date of actual service as per hon'ble apex court’s decision in B.J Shelat vs. State of Gujarat [1978] AIR SC 1109 (SC) that has to be taken as the date of the order in issue. Their lordships detailed discussion to this effect reads as under:- “… We shall now deal with the other references…

ACIT, Circle-50(1), Kolkata vs. Sunil Agarwal, Kolkata

ITA 1194/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.1194/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit, Circle-50(1), Kolkata Vs. Sunil Agarwal Da-12, Sector-I, Salt Lake City, Kolkata – 700 064. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Actpa 4135 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Cross Objection No.10/Kol/2019 (A/O I.T.A Nos.1194/Kol/2017) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sunil Agarwal Vs. Acit, Circle-50(1), Kolkata . Da-12, Sector-I, Salt Lake City, Kolkata – 700 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Actpa 4135 D (Cross-Objector) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri C. J. Singh, Jcit, Sr. Dr Respondent By : Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Fca सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/02/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Revenue’S Appeal & Assessee’S Cross-Objection For Assessment Year 2011-12 Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 15, Kolkata Dated 28.03.2017 Passed In Case No.112/Cit(A)-15/15-16/Dcit,Cc- 4(3)/R&T/Kol U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

For Appellant: Shri C. J. Singh, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA
Section 143(3)

…2014 and the order has got time barred and it is illegal. In support of his proposition, appellant has cited the following judgments/decisions. 1. State of Andhra Pradesh vs. M. Ramakrishtaiah & Co.- 93 STC 40; (SC). 2. CIT vs. Shri Narayani Chandrika Trust – 212 ITR 456 (Ker) I.T.A Nos.1194/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sunil Agarwal 3. Government of Wood Works vs. State of Kerala - 69 STC 62 (SC) 4. Mafatlal Industries Ltd. & Another vs. CTO & Others - 101 STC 461 (ITAT, Kolkata). 5. Shanti Lal Ghodawat & ors. Vs. ACIT- (2009) 726 TTJ (Jd) 135 (ITAT, Jodhpur) 6. CIT vs. M/s. Rai Bahadur Kishore Chand & Sons…

M/S the Augustinian Society, Bangalore vs. Asst.DIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 973/BANG/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 10Section 10(22)Section 11(2)Section 143(2)

…t was submitted that the exemption u/s 10(22A) is also available for trusts or societies running a hospital. Both Sections 10(22) and 10(22A) are analogous as pointed out by the Lordships of the Kerala High Court in CIT Vs Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust (1995) 212 ITR 456 (Kerala) as under:- Page 6 of 11 “We have already pointed out that this section is analogous to Section 10(22) which relates to educational institutions and, therefore, the decisions thereunder and the analogy of trusts or societies running educational institutions could usefully be referred to for deciding the point in issue”. 11. The ld. AR f…