COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER v. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

370 ITR 81High Court2015#20654 most cited
4

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

Sections most often in play

Section 10(23C)(iiiab)Section 143(1)Section 250

Judgments citing COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER v. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

Institute Management Committee of Government Iti Peth, Peth vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nashik

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2380/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2380/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2022-23

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Bafna and Shri Aakash ParakhFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Pawar
Section 10Section 10(23)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

…assessee might be having a bona fide belief that the provisions of s. 139(4A) are applicable to it and hence the penalty imposed by the AO is not justified. We, therefore, delete the same in both the years." (3) CIT v. Indian Institute of Management, [2015] 370 ITR 81/[2014] 226 Taxman 301/49 taxmann.com 136. The Hon'ble High Court in this case observed as under: "(7) The facts of this case and the material on record clearly establish that the assessee is wholly or substantially financed by the Government and therefore, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of exemption under s. 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. In…

The Director of Income-Tax vs. Dhamapakasha Rajakarya Prasakta

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/251/2009HC Karnataka16 Jan 2015

Bench: B.VEERAPPA,N.KUMAR

Section 260

…isfied all the legal requirements provided under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. In fact, this Court had occasion to consider the said question in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER V. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT reported in (2015) 370 ITR 81 (KARN) and a finance to the extent of more than 10% of the total finance would constitute substantial finance and therefore the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the assessee is entitled to the benefit exempted under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act cannot be found fault with. 6. In the light of the aforesaid findings, in our view i…

The Director of Income-Tax vs. Dhamapakasha Rajakarya Prasakta

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/237/2009HC Karnataka16 Jan 2015

Bench: B.VEERAPPA,N.KUMAR

Section 260

…isfied all the legal requirements provided under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. In fact, this Court had occasion to consider the said question in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER V. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT reported in (2015) 370 ITR 81 (KARN) and a finance to the extent of more than 10% of the total finance would constitute substantial finance and therefore the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the assessee is entitled to the benefit exempted under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act cannot be found fault with. 6. In the light of the aforesaid findings, in our view i…

The Director of Income-Tax vs. Dhamapakasha Rajakarya Prasakta

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/232/2009HC Karnataka16 Jan 2015

Bench: B.VEERAPPA,N.KUMAR

Section 260

…isfied all the legal requirements provided under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act. In fact, this Court had occasion to consider the said question in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER V. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT reported in (2015) 370 ITR 81 (KARN) and a finance to the extent of more than 10% of the total finance would constitute substantial finance and therefore the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the assessee is entitled to the benefit exempted under Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act cannot be found fault with. 6. In the light of the aforesaid findings, in our view i…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER v. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT (370 ITR 81) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax