CIT v. Thanthi Trust

239 ITR 502Supreme Court of India1999#5732 most cited
20

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 12ASection 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 10(23C)(vf)Section 12Section 12AASection 13(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

application of income for charitable purposesapplication of incomesection 12asection 11section 143(3)

Judgments citing CIT v. Thanthi Trust

SAVE A FAMILY PLAN (INDIA),,KANJOOR vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 138/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Save A Family Plan (India) Dy. Cit, Exemption Aiswaryagram, Parappuram San Juan Towers, 2Nd Floor Vs. Kanjoor - 683575 Old Railway Station Road [Pan:Aabts9439E] Kochi 682018 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abraham J. Markose, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

…other charitable trust amount to 6 Save A Family Plan (India) application of income for charitable purposes as held by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sri Aurobindo Memorial Fund Society 247 ITR 93 affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 239 ITR 502. However, the only condition is that such donations should be consistent with the objects of the trust as laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shriram Education Foundation v. DIT (Exemption) 262 ITR 164 (Del) following the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Aditnar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT [1997] 224 IT…

ALLIANCE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION,MALAKKARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA

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

ITA 903/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Sri.M.S.Venkitachalam, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

…Fund Society (2001) 247 ITR 93 (Mad) following its earlier decision in the case of CIT v. Thanthi Trust (1982) 137 ITR 375 (Mad). It must be noted that the decision of the Madras High Court in Thanthi Trust was ratified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (1999) 239 ITR 502 (SC). Similarly, the issue also stands settled by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl.CIT (1997) 224 ITR 310 (SC). The same view taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Shri Ram Memorial Foundation (2004) 269 ITR 35 (Delhi). It is also to be noted that the Parliamen…

DCIT,CIRCLE-1(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S INDO GLOBAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION, KHARAR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 26/CHANDI/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 26/Chd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit, M/S Indo Global बनाम Circle-1(Exemptions), Education Foundation, Chandigarh Vill. Abhipur, Vs. Sub Tehsil Majra, Tehsil Kharar, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaati2838L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)

…the Ld. Counsel on a number of case laws wherein, it was held that the exemption u/s 11 could not be denied merely on the ground that the amount had been donated by the assessee trust, following case laws were brought on record: a) CIT v. Thanthi Trust (1999) 239 ITR 502 (SC) in 1999 TaxPub (DT) 0051 (SC) b) All Saints School vs Ito Exemption (Del ITAT) 105 taxmann.com 149 dated 29.03.2019 c) CIT v. Trustees of Jadi Trust (1982) 133 ITR 494 (Bom.) in 1982 Tax Pub (DT) 0491 (Bom-HC) d) CIT v. Nirmala Baku Bhai Foundation (1997) 226 ITR 394 (Guj.) in 1997 Tax Pub (DT) 0574 (Guj-HC) e) CIT v. Shri Ram Memorial Found…

THE THANTHI TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ADIT (EXEMPTIONS) , CHENNAI

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

ITA 2720/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri V. S. Jayakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1532, 1533 & 1534/CHNY/2015 & 2720/CHNY/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/s. The Thanthi Trust, The JCIT (OSD)(Exemptions)II/ 86, EVK Sampath Road, v. DDIT(Exemptions-II(i/c) / Chennai – 600 007. JDIT (Exemptions) / ACIT (Exemptions) Chennai – 34. PAN: AAATT0038R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent…

THE THANTHI TRUST,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1534/CHNY/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jul 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri V. S. Jayakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1532, 1533 & 1534/CHNY/2015 & 2720/CHNY/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/s. The Thanthi Trust, The JCIT (OSD)(Exemptions)II/ 86, EVK Sampath Road, v. DDIT(Exemptions-II(i/c) / Chennai – 600 007. JDIT (Exemptions) / ACIT (Exemptions) Chennai – 34. PAN: AAATT0038R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent…

THE THANTHI TRUST,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1533/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jul 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri V. S. Jayakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1532, 1533 & 1534/CHNY/2015 & 2720/CHNY/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/s. The Thanthi Trust, The JCIT (OSD)(Exemptions)II/ 86, EVK Sampath Road, v. DDIT(Exemptions-II(i/c) / Chennai – 600 007. JDIT (Exemptions) / ACIT (Exemptions) Chennai – 34. PAN: AAATT0038R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent…

THE THANTHI TRUST,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1532/CHNY/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jul 2022AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri V. S. Jayakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, CIT
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1532, 1533 & 1534/CHNY/2015 & 2720/CHNY/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/s. The Thanthi Trust, The JCIT (OSD)(Exemptions)II/ 86, EVK Sampath Road, v. DDIT(Exemptions-II(i/c) / Chennai – 600 007. JDIT (Exemptions) / ACIT (Exemptions) Chennai – 34. PAN: AAATT0038R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent…

SHALOM CHARITABLE MINISTRIES OF INDIA,PALAKKAD vs. THE ACIT, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals as well as stay applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 645/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Shivadas Chettoor, FCAFor Respondent: Sri.Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 2(15)

…, Bangalore Bench in the case of Janalakshmi Social Services vs. DIT(Exemptions), 33 SOT 197 which is decided against the assessee. In the judgments of the Supreme court in the cases of Thiagarajar Charities vs. ACIT (225 ITR 1010) and ACIT vs. Thanthi Trust (239 ITR 502), the cases are not relating to micro finance activities. Similar is the position with the decision of the ITAT, Chennai Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Jeppiar Educational Trust in ITA Nos. 1333, 1334, 1591 to 1595/Mds/2010 dated 15/06/2011 and decision of the ITAT, Kolkata Bench in the case of Sreema Mahila Samity vs. DCIT dated 13/10/2017. In vi…

.SHALOM CHARITABLE MINISTRIES OF INDIA,PALAKKAD vs. THE ACIT, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals as well as stay applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 644/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Mar 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Shivadas Chettoor, FCAFor Respondent: Sri.Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 2(15)

…, Bangalore Bench in the case of Janalakshmi Social Services vs. DIT(Exemptions), 33 SOT 197 which is decided against the assessee. In the judgments of the Supreme court in the cases of Thiagarajar Charities vs. ACIT (225 ITR 1010) and ACIT vs. Thanthi Trust (239 ITR 502), the cases are not relating to micro finance activities. Similar is the position with the decision of the ITAT, Chennai Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Jeppiar Educational Trust in ITA Nos. 1333, 1334, 1591 to 1595/Mds/2010 dated 15/06/2011 and decision of the ITAT, Kolkata Bench in the case of Sreema Mahila Samity vs. DCIT dated 13/10/2017. In vi…

DCIT (EXEMPTION), UTTAR PRADESH vs. M/S. DIVYA YOG MANDIR TRUST, HARIDWAR

ITA 5612/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ation during the year of receipt itself. The above position may kindly be brought to the notice of all officers working in your charge.” 4.22 In support, the Ld. AR placed reliance on the following decisions:- 5 ITA No.5612/Del./2015 i) CIT Vs Thanthi Trust 239 ITR 502 (SC) ii) CIT Vs Trustees of Jadi Trust 133 ITR 494 (Bom.) iii) CIT Vs Hindustan Charity Trust 139 ITR 913 (Cal.) iv) CIT Vs Nirmala Bakubhai Foundation 226 ITR 394 (Guj.) v) CIT vs Shri Ram Memorial Foundation 269 ITR 35 (Del.) vi) CIT Vs HPS Social Welfare Foundation 235 CTR 330 (Del.) …………….. 6.6.4. Further allegation of Ld. CIT(DR) remained th…

JCIT (OSD), CHENNAI vs. SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1795/CHNY/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1650/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, Tax, Vs. Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 101. Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1793, 1794 & 1795/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, (Osd), Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034 Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Respondent: Shri.Homi Rajvangh, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…counting. 4.3 The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that the assessee adopted a device to postpone the income for the purpose of Income Tax only. 4.4 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Thanthi Trust (239 ITR 502) has approved in principle the proposition that book entries to have a legal effect and cannot be ignored merely because they are book entries. 31. It was noticed by the AO during assessment proceeding that in the balance sheet as on 31.03.2003 Rs. 45,67,354 was shown as 'unearned income' under the head 'current liabilities' as against Rs. 15,13,…

JCIT (OSD), CHENNAI vs. SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1794/CHNY/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1650/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, Tax, Vs. Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 101. Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1793, 1794 & 1795/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, (Osd), Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034 Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Respondent: Shri.Homi Rajvangh, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…counting. 4.3 The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that the assessee adopted a device to postpone the income for the purpose of Income Tax only. 4.4 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Thanthi Trust (239 ITR 502) has approved in principle the proposition that book entries to have a legal effect and cannot be ignored merely because they are book entries. 31. It was noticed by the AO during assessment proceeding that in the balance sheet as on 31.03.2003 Rs. 45,67,354 was shown as 'unearned income' under the head 'current liabilities' as against Rs. 15,13,…

JCIT (OSD), CHENNAI vs. SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1793/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1650/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, Tax, Vs. Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 101. Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1793, 1794 & 1795/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S. Sify Technologies Ltd., Tidel Park, 2Nd Floor, (Osd), Large Taxpayer Unit – 1, No.4, Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034 Taramani, Chennai – 600 113. [Pan: Aaacs 9032R] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Respondent: Shri.Homi Rajvangh, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…counting. 4.3 The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that the assessee adopted a device to postpone the income for the purpose of Income Tax only. 4.4 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Thanthi Trust (239 ITR 502) has approved in principle the proposition that book entries to have a legal effect and cannot be ignored merely because they are book entries. 31. It was noticed by the AO during assessment proceeding that in the balance sheet as on 31.03.2003 Rs. 45,67,354 was shown as 'unearned income' under the head 'current liabilities' as against Rs. 15,13,…

COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE

ITA/312/2016HC Karnataka17 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 12ASection 260

…20/47 5. Having heard the learned Counsels, we are of the opinion that the said findings of the learned Tribunal relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Thanthi Trust – (1999) 239 ITR 502 (SC) and other High Court judgments in Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Charitable Trust (1981) 7 Taxman 178 (AP) = 131 ITR 479 and Radhaswami Satsang Sabha (1954) 25 ITR 472 (Allahabad) are correct and justified findings of fact. The learned Tribunal has rightly held that Sec. 11(1)(a) of the Act does not employ the term `spent’ bu…

ACIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. MAHIMA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

ITA 105/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Mar 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar (CIT)
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 32

…to the other institutions which qualifies for exemption u/s 11 of the Act is eligible for exemption being application u/s 11(1)(a) of the Act. The reliance for this purpose is placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- (i) CIT vs. Thanthi Trust (1999) 239 ITR 502 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Sri Ram Memorial Foundation (2004) 269 ITR 35 (Del.) (iii) CIT vs. Hindustan Charity Trust (1983) 139 ITR 913 (Cal.) (iv) CIT vs. Arbindo Memorial Fund Society (2001) 247 ITR 93 (Mad.) (v) St. Thomas Education Society v. Asst. DIT (2007) 11 SOT 340 (Mum.) 42. In view of the above submissions and case laws, it was submitted that…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 859/CHNY/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. M.M.Bhusari, IRS, CITFor Respondent: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 148Section 40

…unting. 4.3 The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that the assessee adopted a device to postpone the income for the purpose of Income Tax only. 4.4 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Thanthi Trust (239 ITR 502) has approved in principle the proposition that book entries to have a legal effect and cannot be ignored merely because they are book entries. 31. It was noticed by the AO during assessment proceeding that in the balance sheet as on 31.03.2003 Rs. 45,67,354 was shown as 'unearned income' under the head 'current liabilities' as against Rs. 15,13…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 439/CHNY/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. M.M.Bhusari, IRS, CITFor Respondent: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 148Section 40

…unting. 4.3 The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that the assessee adopted a device to postpone the income for the purpose of Income Tax only. 4.4 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Thanthi Trust (239 ITR 502) has approved in principle the proposition that book entries to have a legal effect and cannot be ignored merely because they are book entries. 31. It was noticed by the AO during assessment proceeding that in the balance sheet as on 31.03.2003 Rs. 45,67,354 was shown as 'unearned income' under the head 'current liabilities' as against Rs. 15,13…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. SIFY TECHNOLOGIES LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 435/CHNY/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Dr. M.M.Bhusari, IRS, CITFor Respondent: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(2)Section 148Section 40

…unting. 4.3 The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that the assessee adopted a device to postpone the income for the purpose of Income Tax only. 4.4 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Thanthi Trust (239 ITR 502) has approved in principle the proposition that book entries to have a legal effect and cannot be ignored merely because they are book entries. 31. It was noticed by the AO during assessment proceeding that in the balance sheet as on 31.03.2003 Rs. 45,67,354 was shown as 'unearned income' under the head 'current liabilities' as against Rs. 15,13…

ASSTT CIT (E) -I(1), MUMBAI vs. K.J.SOMAIYA TRUST, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3774/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2008-09

Section 11(6)

…Satsang Sabha (1954) 25 ITR 472 (All.) ii. CIT vs HEH the Nizam Charitable Trust (1981) 131 ITR 497(AP) iii. Nachi Muthu Industrial Association vs CIT (1999) 235 ITR 190 (SC), iv. CIT vs Thanthi Trust (1982) 137 ITR 735 (Mad.), v. CIT vs Thanthi Trust (1999) 239 ITR 502 (SC) 3.2. Under section 11(1)(a) income derived from property held under trust for charity, to the extent such income is applied for charitable or religious purposes will be exempt from income tax (Tirupati Trust vs CIT) (230 ITR 636, 640 (SC), thus, it is clear that the pre-requisite conditions for application of income u/s 11(1)(a), earlier pa…

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE ACADEMY FOR MANAGEMENT EDUCATION, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for both Assessment Years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are dismissed

ITA 1075/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2015AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.)For Respondent: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘ B ’ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T. A. Nos.1075 & 1076/Bang/2014 (Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10) Dy. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle 17(2), Bangalore. …. Appellant. Vs. Ohio University Christ College, Academy for Management Education, 4th Floor, Christ University Campus, Hosur Road, Bangalore. ….. Respondent. PAN AAATO 1522D Appellant By : Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.) Respondent By : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate. Date of Hearing : 06.08.2015. Date of Pronouncement : 9.10.201…

CIT v. Thanthi Trust (239 ITR 502) — Cited in 20 Judgments | BharatTax