What is Director, ITO v. Govinda authority for?

Repayment of loans taken for legitimate charitable activities is considered an application of income for charitable purposes, even if the expenditure is capital in nature. However, this treatment may be affected by subsequent amendments disallowing loan repayment if capital expenditure against such borrowing was claimed as application.

How many judgments cite Director, ITO v. Govinda?

34 judgments on BharatTax cite Director, ITO v. Govinda (315 ITR 237), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Director, ITO v. Govinda come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11, Section 12, Section 12A, Section 143(3), Section 12AA, Section 143(1).

Director, ITO v. Govinda (315 ITR 237)

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CGO COMPLEX, HAPUR CHUNGI vs. KANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MOTIJHEEL, KANPUR

ITA 4580/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

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

…Association v. CIT [2007] 294 ITR 262/163 Тахтап 228 (MP), where it was observed that the promotion of commercial trade is a charitable purpose under section 2(15) of the Act". In the case of Director of Income -Tax (Exemption) v. GovinduNaicker Estate [2009] 315 ITR 237 (Mad), it was observed that the construction of commercial complex by charitable trust eligible. 20. If the objects of the "Authority" is charitable as public utility then the benefit being a charitable trust is eligible as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT Vs. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561 / [2008] 166 Taxman 58 (SC), where…

CHERUVATHUR FOUNDATION,KOCHI vs. ACIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, KOCHI

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

ITA 1063/COCH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2014-15 Cheruvathur Foundation .......... Appellant Hig 5, Panampilly Nagar, Kochi 682036 [Pan: Aabtc0724E] Vs. Acit (Exemptions), Kochi .......... Respondent Appellant By: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Veni Raj, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-4, Chennai, Dated 23.10.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Charitable Trust Found With The Object Of Imparting Education. It Is Duly Registered U/S. 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). The Appellant Trust Filed Return Of Income For 2014-15 On 31.03.2015 Disclosing Nil Income After Claiming Exemption U/S. 11 Of The Act. In 2 Cheruvathur Foundation The Return Of Income The Appellant Claimed The Amount Spent On Acquisition Of Fixed Assets & Repayment Of Loans To Bank As Application Of Income. The Said Return Of Income Was Processed By The Cpc Vide Intimation Dated 16.03.2016 By Making Adjustment Of The Cost Of Fixed Assets Of Rs. 1,25,20.205/- & Repayment Of Loans Of Rs. 4,68,87,408/- By Not Allowing As Application Of Income. Being Aggrieved By The Said Intimation, An Application U/S. 154 Of The Act Was Filed Before The Cpc. The Intimation Was Amended By Allowing The Cost Of Asset As An Application Of Income & Confirmed The Adjustment Of Repayment Of Loan Of Rs. 4,68,87,408/- & Also Not Allowed Carry Forward Of Excess Amount Spent In Earlier Years.

For Appellant: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Veni Raj, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154

…ct of the trust. Application amount can be for revenue or capital purpose. Repayment of loan also been held to be application of income by the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (E) v. Govindn Naicker Estate [2009] 315 ITR 237. In any way, we are of the considered opinion that these adjustments are beyond the scope of provisions of section 143(1) of the Act. Therefore, we direct the CPC/AO to amend the intimation by deleting the addition of repayment of loan. Thus, ground Nos. B & C of the appeal stand allowed. 8. Ground No. D challenges the action of the CPC as confi…

M/S.PODIKUNJU MUSALIAR MEMORIAL CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KOLLAM vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, KOCHI

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

ITA 110/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Arun Raj S, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.110/Coch/2023 : Asst.Year 2017-2018 Podikunju Musaliar Memorial The Commissioner of Charitable and Educational v. Income-tax (Exemption) Kochi. Trust, Chandanathoppe Kollam – 691 014. PAN : AAATP8905H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.Arun Raj S, Advocate Respondent by : Sri.Sundarasan, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 22.05.2025 Date of Hearing : 21.05.2025. O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : The present appeal of the assessee is arising from th…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU vs. NAGARJUNA EDUCATION SCOEITY, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 479/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, JCIT-DR

Section 11Section 12A

…11.5 Besides the above, there were judicial pronouncement where similar principles have been laid, detailed as under: • Rajasthan High Cout - CIT Vs. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation (164 ITR 439) • Madras High Court - DIT Vs. Govinda Naicker Estate (315 ITR 237) • Bombay High Court -DIT (Exemption) Vs. GKR Charities (214 Taxman 555) 11.6 These rulings consistently affirm that when a charitable trust borrows funds for legitimate charitable activities, the repayment of such borrowings should be treated as an application of income. Page 7 of 7 11.7 We further note that the amendment introduced by the Fin…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRLE-1,(EXEMPTIONS), BENGALURU vs. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 208/BANG/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Aug 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Soundararajan K.Assistant Commissioner Of Bangalore Development Authority, Income Tax, Circle-1, T. Chowdaiah Road, Kumarapark (Exemptions), Bengaluru Vs. West, Seshadripuram S.O., Bangalore North, Bangalore-560020 Pan – Aaalb0060D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri. T. Srinivasa, Ca Revenue By: Sri. D.K. Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.08.2024 O R D E R Per: Soundararajan K., J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Challenging The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi Dated 8.12.2023 In Respect Of The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Statutory Body Under The Government Of Karnataka & They Are Regular In Filing Their Return Of Income. The Assessee Also Got Registration Under Section 12Aa Of The Act W.E.F. 1.04.2003. During The Assessment Year 2008-09, The Assessee Filed Their Original Return Of Income On 25.09.2008 & Claimed Exemption Under Section 11 & 12 Of The Act. The Assessee Also Filed The Audit Report Alongwith The Return Of Income. The Return Was Processed & The Ao Accepted The Same. Thereafter, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Notice Was Issued On Various Dates & The Assessee Also Appeared & Filed Their

For Appellant: Sri. T. Srinivasa, CAFor Respondent: Sri. D.K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 147

…the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Naicker Estate (2009) 315 ITR 237 (Madras) to allow the appeal of the assessee as the facts of the case relied upon are distinguishable from the present case. In the case of Naicker Estate (2009) 315 ITR 237 (Madras), the AO disallowed the claim of the assessee regarding repayment of loan borrowed for construction of commercial complex as "application of income" for charitable purpose on the ground that construction of multi storeyed commercial complex was not one of the objects of the trust and as such, the expenditure incurred for the construction…

GOLDEN INDIA FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD,, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 98/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 98/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 M/s. Golden India Foundation AA-13, Jay Ambey Nagar, Opp. Old Jaipur Hospital, Tonk Road, Jaipur cuke Vs. The ITO Exemption- Ward Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTG 3675 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri C.L. Yadav, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Da

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT

…ble and religious purposes in a particular year and the said loan is repaid out of the income of the subsequent year, the said repayment would be entitled to the exemption from tax u/s. 11(1) e. Director Income-tax (Exemption) v. Govindu Naicker Estate (2009) 315 ITR 237 (Mad). Relevant Section-11,During the assessment under 15 ITA 98/JP/2023 GOLDEN INDIA FOUNDATION, JAIPUR VS ITO (EXEMPTION), AJMER section 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer noted that the trust had made part repayment of a loan taken from the bank for constructing a multi- storied building. The Assessing Officer opined that the multi-sto…

VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 267/ALLD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R

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

…Association v. CIT [2007] 294 ITR 262/163 Taxman 228 (MP), where it was observed that "the promotion of commercial trade is a charitable purpose under Section 2(15) of the Act". In the case of Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. GovinduNaicker Estate [2009] 315 ITR 237 (Mad), it was observed that the construction of commercial complex by charitable trust is eligible. 20. If the objects of the "Authority" is charitable as public utility then the benefit being a charitable trust is eligible as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561/[2008] 166 Taxman 58 (SC), where…

VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASEE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 266/ALLD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R

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

…Association v. CIT [2007] 294 ITR 262/163 Taxman 228 (MP), where it was observed that "the promotion of commercial trade is a charitable purpose under Section 2(15) of the Act". In the case of Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. GovinduNaicker Estate [2009] 315 ITR 237 (Mad), it was observed that the construction of commercial complex by charitable trust is eligible. 20. If the objects of the "Authority" is charitable as public utility then the benefit being a charitable trust is eligible as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561/[2008] 166 Taxman 58 (SC), where…

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), VARANASI

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 265/ALLD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R

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

…Association v. CIT [2007] 294 ITR 262/163 Taxman 228 (MP), where it was observed that "the promotion of commercial trade is a charitable purpose under Section 2(15) of the Act". In the case of Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. GovinduNaicker Estate [2009] 315 ITR 237 (Mad), it was observed that the construction of commercial complex by charitable trust is eligible. 20. If the objects of the "Authority" is charitable as public utility then the benefit being a charitable trust is eligible as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561/[2008] 166 Taxman 58 (SC), where…

M/S. VARANASI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,VARANASI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , VARANASI

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 264/ALLD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R

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

…Association v. CIT [2007] 294 ITR 262/163 Taxman 228 (MP), where it was observed that "the promotion of commercial trade is a charitable purpose under Section 2(15) of the Act". In the case of Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. GovinduNaicker Estate [2009] 315 ITR 237 (Mad), it was observed that the construction of commercial complex by charitable trust is eligible. 20. If the objects of the "Authority" is charitable as public utility then the benefit being a charitable trust is eligible as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT v. Gujarat Maritime Board [2007] 295 ITR 561/[2008] 166 Taxman 58 (SC), where…

M/S U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD,LUCKNOW vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 701/LKW/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Jun 2022AY 2017-18