DIT (Exemptions) v. National Safety Council

305 ITR 257High Court2008#11469 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(23C)Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 254

Judgments citing DIT (Exemptions) v. National Safety Council

The Institute of Marine Engineers India, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5666/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Karthik Natarajan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, SR DR
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254

…uding the Tribunal. We have also perused the two decisions, one of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and relied upon by both the counsel and equally a short judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of DIT (Exemptions) v. National Safety Council [2008] 305 ITR 257 (Bom). We are of the opinion that the Tribunal has applied the correct test in concluding that the exemption under section 11 can be availed of by the Respondent - Assessee. In doing so, the Tribunal referred to the objects as set out in the Trust Deed of the Respondent - Assessee. They are to set up, administer and maintain technical training in…

Aarambh Foundation, Indore vs. The CIT Exemption, Byhopal

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/IND/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jan 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniaarambh Foundation Cit-(Exemption) 220 Saket Nagar Bhopal Saket Nagar Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabaa 0609F Assessee By Shri Kunal Agrawal Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 04.01.2024

Section 12A

…e have gone through the relevant records and impugned order. The learned AR argued that its activities are non-commercial and wrongly denied benefit of Section 11 of the Act. The learned AR relied upon on following cases: i. DIT(E) vs. National Safety Council 305 ITR 257 (Bom), ii. Saurashtra Education Foundation vs. CIT 273 ITR 139, iii. Harnam Singh Harbans Kaur vs. Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [2012] 17 taxmann.com 103 (Delhi Tribunal), iv. CIT(A) vs. Gujarat Maritime Board: 2007 14 SCC 704, v. CIT vs. Ahmedabad Rana Caste Assn. (1982) 2 SCC 542, vi. CIT vs. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965) 55 IT…

Crisp Society, Bhopal vs. DCIT Exemption, Bhopal

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

ITA 298/IND/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri
Section 11Section 2(15)

…have gone through the relevant records and impugned order. The learned AR argued that its activities are non-commercial and wrongly denied benefit of Section 11 of the Act. The learned AR relied upon on following cases: i. DIT(E) vs. National Safety Council 305 ITR 257 (Bom), ii. Saurashtra Education Foundation vs. CIT 273 ITR 139, iii. Harnam Singh Harbans Kaur vs. Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [2012] 17 taxmann.com 103 (Delhi Tribunal), iv. CIT(A) vs. Gujarat Maritime Board: 2007 14 SCC 704, v. CIT vs. Ahmedabad Rana Caste Assn. (1982) 2 SCC 542, vi. CIT vs. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965) 55 IT…

Crisp Society, Bhopal vs. DCIT -Exemption, Bhopal

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

ITA 297/IND/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri
Section 11Section 2(15)

…have gone through the relevant records and impugned order. The learned AR argued that its activities are non-commercial and wrongly denied benefit of Section 11 of the Act. The learned AR relied upon on following cases: i. DIT(E) vs. National Safety Council 305 ITR 257 (Bom), ii. Saurashtra Education Foundation vs. CIT 273 ITR 139, iii. Harnam Singh Harbans Kaur vs. Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi [2012] 17 taxmann.com 103 (Delhi Tribunal), iv. CIT(A) vs. Gujarat Maritime Board: 2007 14 SCC 704, v. CIT vs. Ahmedabad Rana Caste Assn. (1982) 2 SCC 542, vi. CIT vs. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965) 55 IT…

Vaibhagiya Prashaskiya Prashikshan Sanstha, Nashik vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, (Exemption), Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1637/PUN/2019[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2020

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1637/Pun/2019 Vibhagiya Prashaskiya Prashikshan Sanstha, C/O. Divisional Commissioner Office Campus, Near Isp, Nashik Road, Nashik-422 101 Pan : Aabtn5566D .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ashish BhalgatFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg
Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ontrary to the law. For this purposes, we may rely upon the decision of CIT Vs. Andhra Pradesh Police Welfare Society 148 ITR 287 (Andhra Pradesh) and Water and land Management Training Research Institute DIT 40 ITR (Trib.) and DIT Vs. National Safely Counsel 305 ITR 257. In all these decisions, it was held that the object of general public utility is wider and larger object which encompasses the object like imparting the training to the Govt employees 5 working in various Department and Revenue. The Govt. Employees working with state govt. belongs to various state of the society and they are not restricted to o…

The Mehli Mehta Music Foundation, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 7608/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: S/shri S.E. DwturFor Respondent: Ms. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak, DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…this view is supported by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi Music Society vs. Director General of Income-tax (2013) 357 ITR 265 (Delhi) and Bombay High Court in the case of Director of Income-tax vs. National Safety Council (2008) 305 ITR 257 (Bombay). 14. On the other hand, the learned Sr. DR stated that the case laws relied on by the learned Counsel for the assessee are on its own facts and facts in present case do not support the facts cited in the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi Music Society and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of National safety c…

Maritime Training and Research Foundaton, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1733/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 Maritime Training & Ddit(Exemption)-1(2), Research Foundation, Mumbai बनाम/ Mackinnon Mackenzie Vs. Building, 1St Floor, Shoorji Vallabhdas Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400038 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaatm5180H "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Prakash K. Jotwani राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Purushottam Kumar- Dr

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

…uding the Tribunal. We have also perused the two decisions, one of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and relied upon by both the counsel and equally a short judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of DIT (Exemptions) v. National Safety Council [2008] 305 ITR 257 (Bom). We are of the opinion that the Tribunal has applied the correct test in concluding that the exemption under section 11 can be availed of by the Respondent - Assessee. In doing so, the Tribunal referred to the objects as set out in the Trust Deed of the Respondent - Assessee. They are to set up, administer and maintain technical training in…

Maritime Training & Research Foundation, Mumbai vs. ADIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7247/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7247/Mum/2012 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Maritime Training & Research बनधम/ Asstt. Director Of Income Tax Foundation, (Exemption) 1(1), 5Th Floor, Vs. Mackinnon Mackenzie Building, Piramal Chambers, 1St Fl, Shoorji Vallabhadas Marg, Parel, Ballard Estate , Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400038

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

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “बी” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7247/Mum/2012 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Maritime Training and Research बनधम/ Asstt. Director of Income Tax Foundation, (Exemption) 1(1), 5th floor, Vs. Mackinnon Mackenzie Building, Piramal Chambers, 1st fl, Shoorji Vallabhadas Marg, Parel, Ballard Estate , Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400038 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ PAN : AAATM5180H अपीऱार्थी ओर से / Assessee by Shri Prakash Jotwani प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Revenue by Shri G…

M/S Society for Participatory Research in Asia, New Delhi vs. ITO (E), New Delhi

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

ITA 2657/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Society For Participatory Research In Vs. Income Tax Officer(E), Trust Ward-Iii, Asia, 42,Tughlakabad Instutional Area, New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aaats1994H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

…falls within the ambit of “education” under section 2(15) of the Act: (a) 321 ITR 73 (Delhi) ICAI Accounting Research Foundation vs. DGIT (E) (b) ITO (E) vs. Society for Essential Health Action Trust (ITA No. 4329/Del/2012 for AY 2009-10 dated 21.2.2014) (c) 305 ITR 257 National Safety Council (Bombay) (d) 74 TTJ 523 Indian Institute of Bankers vs. DDIT (Exemptions) 4.4 Furthermore, it was contended that the receipts of the society have been applied towards the objects of the appellant society and the surplus has been carried forward to be applied to attain the objects of the society in the subsequent years. It…

DIT (Exemptions) v. National Safety Council (305 ITR 257) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax