CIT v. Working Women’s Forum

365 ITR 353High Court2014#3477 most cited

What is CIT v. Working Women’s Forum authority for?

When an exemption is denied under Section 13(1)(c) or (d), the denial of exemption applies only to the portion of income that violates these provisions, not the entire income.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Working Women's Forum · section 13(1)(d) · section 11 exemption · denial of exemption · maximum marginal rate · income-tax · charitable trust · violation of provisions · Madras High Court · 365 ITR 353

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(d)Section 13(3)Section 164(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 13(l)(d)section 164(2)section 13(1)(d)section 10(33)section 13(2)section 164section 11(5)section 13(3)section 13(1)(c)maximum marginal ratesection 13(1)section 11(1)(a)

Judgments citing CIT v. Working Women’s Forum

ITO (E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Iilm Foundation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1131/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…llers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot be withdrawn. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT versus Working Women’s forum, 365 ITR 353 and in catena of other decision which has been placed on record by the learned counsel which is not being incorporated here. Thus, we hold that in the event of any violation of provision of section 13, the entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied and would be restricted only to this extent of income misused by the Trust. Accordingly, we…

ADIT(E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Iilm Foundation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2872/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…llers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot be withdrawn. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT versus Working Women’s forum, 365 ITR 353 and in catena of other decision which has been placed on record by the learned counsel which is not being incorporated here. Thus, we hold that in the event of any violation of provision of section 13, the entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied and would be restricted only to this extent of income misused by the Trust. Accordingly, we…

ADIT(E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Iilm Foundation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2871/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…llers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot be withdrawn. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT versus Working Women’s forum, 365 ITR 353 and in catena of other decision which has been placed on record by the learned counsel which is not being incorporated here. Thus, we hold that in the event of any violation of provision of section 13, the entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied and would be restricted only to this extent of income misused by the Trust. Accordingly, we…

ADIT (E), New Delhi vs. Iilm Foundation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2675/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…llers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot be withdrawn. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT versus Working Women’s forum, 365 ITR 353 and in catena of other decision which has been placed on record by the learned counsel which is not being incorporated here. Thus, we hold that in the event of any violation of provision of section 13, the entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied and would be restricted only to this extent of income misused by the Trust. Accordingly, we…

Iilm Foundaion, New Delhi vs. ADIT (Exemption), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1142/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv., Ms. TejasviFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)

…llers Charitable Institutions: 363 ITR 230 (Karn.) held that for violation of section 13(1)(d) entire exemption under section 11 cannot be withdrawn. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT versus Working Women’s forum, 365 ITR 353 and in catena of other decision which has been placed on record by the learned counsel which is not being incorporated here. Thus, we hold that in the event of any violation of provision of section 13, the entire exemption under section 11 cannot be denied and would be restricted only to this extent of income misused by the Trust. Accordingly, we…

DCIT, Exemptions, Chennai vs. Sri Rengambal Educational Trust, Thiruvannamalai

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

ITA 394/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru R.L. Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 394/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Sri Renugambal Educational Trust, Income Tax (Exemptions-Iii), Chennai Vs. I.C.C. Road, Ettivadi, Polur Taluk, Circle, Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Thiruvannamalai 606 907. Building, Iii Floor, 121, M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaets9713L] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri A. Soundararajan, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 14.10.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai Dated 12.12.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erroneously Allowed The Exemption Under Section 11 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“ Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri A. Soundararajan, Addl. CITFor Respondent: None
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 2

…any person referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) or clause (cc) or clause (d) of sub-section (3) of section 13 of the Act. Further, by following the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Working Women’s Forum 365 ITR 353, the ld. CIT(A) held that the Assessing Officer can tax at maximum marginal rate only such part of income which is in violation of section 13(1)(c) of the Act and that the entire benefit of section 11 and 12 of the Act cannot be denied to a trust that has been registered under section 12AA of the Act and accordingly directed the Assessing Officer…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Sree Gokulam Educational and Medical Trust, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly

ITA 1476/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1134/Chny/2013 & 1476/Chny/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2009-2010 & 2010-2011. The Assistant Director Of Vs. M/S. Sree Gokulam Income Tax, Educational & Medical Trust, Exemptions –Iii, 66, Arcot Road, Chennai. Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. [Pan Aafts 0081E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Vidya Ramachandran, Add. CITFor Respondent: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)

…n of Section 11(5) of the Act alone be brought to tax at maximum marginal rate of tax but not entire amount cannot be denied exemption placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Working Women’s Forum (2014) 365 ITR 353 (Mad). The ld. Authorised Representative further submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court was confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by dismissal of SLP in (2015) 235 Taxman 516 (SC). He also placed reliance on the decision of Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s.Sethu Valliammal Educational Trust vs. ITO, Exemptions-I…

DDIT, Chennai vs. Sree Gokulam Educational and Medical Trust, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly

ITA 1134/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1134/Chny/2013 & 1476/Chny/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2009-2010 & 2010-2011. The Assistant Director Of Vs. M/S. Sree Gokulam Income Tax, Educational & Medical Trust, Exemptions –Iii, 66, Arcot Road, Chennai. Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. [Pan Aafts 0081E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Vidya Ramachandran, Add. CITFor Respondent: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(d)

…n of Section 11(5) of the Act alone be brought to tax at maximum marginal rate of tax but not entire amount cannot be denied exemption placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Working Women’s Forum (2014) 365 ITR 353 (Mad). The ld. Authorised Representative further submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court was confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by dismissal of SLP in (2015) 235 Taxman 516 (SC). He also placed reliance on the decision of Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s.Sethu Valliammal Educational Trust vs. ITO, Exemptions-I…

DCIT (E)- 2(1), Mumbai vs. J.R.D Tata Trust, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3154/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3082/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) J.R.D Tata Trust, The Income Tax Officer, Bombay House, 24, Homi 2(4), Mody Street, Fort, [Now Assessed By The Mumbai-400 001 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Income-Tax (Exemptions)- 2(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaatt0165F

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)(h)Section 143(3)Section 164

…er section 11 of the Act and that the remaining income of the assessee continues to enjoy exemption under the said section. Reliance in this regard was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Working Women's Forum (2014) 365 ITR 353 (Mad) and the dismissal of the department's SLP against such judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in 63 taxmann.com 324. It was further held by the CIT(A), that nevertheless, the dividend income is exempt under section 10(34) of the Act. Finally, the CIT(A) allowed the claim of exemption under section 10(34) of the Act on the dividend…

J.R.D. Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) - 2(4) (Now Asssessed by the DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3082/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3082/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) J.R.D Tata Trust, The Income Tax Officer, Bombay House, 24, Homi 2(4), Mody Street, Fort, [Now Assessed By The Mumbai-400 001 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Income-Tax (Exemptions)- 2(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaatt0165F

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, DR
Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)(h)Section 143(3)Section 164

…er section 11 of the Act and that the remaining income of the assessee continues to enjoy exemption under the said section. Reliance in this regard was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Working Women's Forum (2014) 365 ITR 353 (Mad) and the dismissal of the department's SLP against such judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in 63 taxmann.com 324. It was further held by the CIT(A), that nevertheless, the dividend income is exempt under section 10(34) of the Act. Finally, the CIT(A) allowed the claim of exemption under section 10(34) of the Act on the dividend…

M/S. Rishiraj K.M.B. Education Society, Bhopal vs. The CIT, Bhopal

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 434/IND/2014[-]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2018

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: Na

Section 11Section 12ASection 132(1)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…p to the stage of the Tribunal in ITANo.386 to 390/Ind/2014 vide order dated 17.05.2016 had quashed the order of the Ld. CIT. The Ld. Counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Madras High court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Working Women Forum 365 ITR 353 (Mad.), judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income Tax Chennai vs. Working Women Forum 235 Taxman 516(SC). CIT vs. Orpat Charitable Trust 230 Taxman 66 Gujarat, Keshav Madhav Dham Trust vs. CIT Hisar 41 ITR 77 (Del. T), Mohd. Yonus Khan vs. UOI (SC), Income Tax vs. Virendra Singh Memorial 35 SOT (Luc.), Prakash Chand Naht…

DDIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Paramasiva Naidu Muthurvelraj Educational Trust, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the

ITA 2005/CHNY/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.V.Aroon Prasad, JCIT,D.RFor Respondent: Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘ B’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहमपी.जॉज", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.2005/CHNY/2012 & C.O. No.60/CHNY/2013 Assessment year : 2009-10 Vs. M/s.Paramasiva Naidu Deputy Director of Income-Tax Muthuvel Raj Education Trust, (Exemtpions)-III, Block-V, Mugappair, Ayakar Bhavan Annexe Building, Chennai600 050. III Floor, Chennai-34. [PAN AAATP 4092 M ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.R…

Lokmanya Tilad Janakalya Shikshan Sanstha, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -2, Nagpur

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 384/NAG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi..

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri A.R. Ninawe
Section 1Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 40

…u/s 13 of IT. Act 1961. It is only income arising out of such breach benefit of sec. 11 of IT. Act 1961 may not be granted. Reliance on: 1) ITAT order in ITA NO.1712/PN/2007 in the case of M/s. Audyogik Shikshan Mandal vide order dated 03/11/2014 2) (2014) 365 ITR 353 (Mad.) CIT vs. Working Women's Forum 3) (2015) 235 Taxman 0516 (SC) Director of Income Tax vs. Working Women's Forum 4) (2001) 249 ITR 533 (Bom.) 5) (2014) 363 ITR 0230 (Kar:) CIT vs. Fr. Mulles Chartiable Institutions 6) Hon'ble Gujarat High Court order in Tax Appeal No.187 of 2005 in the case of S.P. Mehta Memorial Trust vide order dated13/1…

Asst CIT (E) I(1), Mumbai vs. Jamshetjee Tata Trust, Mumbai

ITA 3807/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2016AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Dilip J. ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johri-DR
Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11aSection 13(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 254(1)

…अिधकरण, ‘जे’ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “J” BENCH सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, , , , "याियक सद"य राम लाल नेगी "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.3807/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2011-12 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" ACIT-(Ex…