CIT v. St. Mary's Seminary

348 ITR 69High Court2012#15730 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT v. St. Mary's Seminary

DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. BHARAT SUSHAMACHAR SAMITI, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 1402/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri George Koshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2Section 2(15)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘A’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1401/Del./2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15) ITA No.1402/Del./2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2016-17) DCIT, Exemption Circle, vs. Bharat Sushamachar Samiti, Ghaziabad. PO-Kulhan, Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun – 248 001 (Uttarakhand) (PAN : AAABB0034D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri George Koshi, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 21.11.2022 Date of Order : 23.11.2022 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : These appeals by the as…

DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. BHARAT SUSHAMACHAR SAMITI, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 1401/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri George Koshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2Section 2(15)

DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. BHARAT SUSHAMACHAR SAMITI, DEHRADUN

ITA 5317/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, M/S. Bharat Sushamachar Samiti, P. O. Kulhan, Vs. Exemption Circle, Sahastradhara Road, Dehradun. Ghaziabad. Pan: Aaabb0034D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri George Koshi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sat Pal Gulati [CIT] – DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…ning of section 2(15) of the I.T.Act, 1961 that would enable it to claim exemption either u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) or under section 11 of the I T Act, 1961. In this context the judgment of the High Court of Kerala in the case of CIT vs. St Mary’s Malankara Seminary 348 ITR 69 (Kerala) is relevant In this case the assessee which was a seminary teaching students for priesthood claimed additional and alternative exemption u/s 10(23C)(mad) The Hon'ble High Court held that the term education enjoys wide connotation covering all kind of coaching and training carried on in a systematic manner leading to personality developmen…

M/S.SNEHA TRUST FOR CHARITY EDUATION,PALALLAD vs. THE ACIT, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 731/COCH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Sri.T.M.SreedharanFor Respondent: Sri.Mrithunjaya Sharma, Sr.DR

Section 68

…pted for the assessment years 2006-2007, 2007-2008 and 2009-2010 and as such, assessment of the corpus donation of Rs.8.80 lakh is unsustainable and is liable to be set aside. The learned AR relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in (2012) 348 ITR 69 (Ker.) : CIT Vs. St. Mary's Malankara Seminary is also relevant. It was held there in that the term "Education" would enjoy wide connotation covering all kinds of coaching and training carried on in a systematic manner leading to personality development of an individual. It was held that religious teaching in the seminary is an education and semin…

MOHD MEHTAB,MEERUT vs. ITO, MEERUT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 511/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 68

…llant refers the following case law in his support, in which it was held that a pure question of law can be raised at any stage of proceedings under Income tax : (i) NTPC Vs. C.I. T. (1998) 229ITR 383 (S. C.) (ii) CIT Vs. St. Mary’s Malakana Seminar (2012) 348 ITR 69 (KER). 3 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 08.09.2009 declaring income at Rs.1,49,840/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and statutory notices were issued to the assessee for verifying the cash deposits of Rs.19.58 lacs in his saving bank account maintained with ICICI Bank, Meerut. It w…

NAHIRA COSMETIC ENTERPRISES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 7(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 7791/MUM/2012[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2016AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singhnahira Cosmetic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 7, Lalwani Indl. Estate, 14, Katrak Road, P.O.Box 7117, Wadala, Mumbai 400 020 Pan: Aaacn 0267D ...... Appellant Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 7(1), Aaykar Bhavan,M.K.Road, Mumbai 400020 .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju

Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the context of the said proposition, the Ld. Representative for the assessee had relied upon the following decisions:- (1) Nirmala L. Mehta vs. CIT, 269 ITR 2(Bom) (2) Smt. Raj Rani Gulati vs. CIT, 346 ITR 543 (All) (3) CIT vs. St. Mary’s Malankara Seminary, 348 ITR 69 (Ker) (4) CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders P. Ltd., 349 ITR 336 (Bom) 6 6.1 The only objection raised by the Revenue is that the omission to raise such a plea before the Assessing Officer and even at the time of initial filing of appeal before the CIT(A) was deliberate and that it was raised in the course of proceedings before the CIT(A)…