DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse

259 ITR 280Supreme Court of India2003#1331 most cited

What is DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse authority for?

Violation of investment mandates under Section 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for a charitable trust results in the complete denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Act.

86

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse · Section 13(1)(d) violation · Section 11 exemption denial · charitable trust investments · denial of tax exemption · Supreme Court ruling · investment modes for trusts · maximum marginal rate · Section 164(2) · trust income exemption

Also reported as

179 CTR 225126 Taxmann 365

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 13(1)(d)Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 80G

Issues it is cited on

section 13(l)(d)section 164(2)section 13(1)(d)section 13(2)section 164section 10(35)section 11(5)section 13(1)cancellation of registrationmaximum marginal ratesection 10(34)section 11(1)(a)

Judgments citing DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse

Jaya Educational Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT Centrl Circle 1 (2), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for the assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14 are allowed and for the assessment years

ITA 2915/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 2915, 3114, 3115/Chny/2019 & 916/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharath, CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(2)Section 13(2)(a)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(e)Section 143(3)

…ugned transactions were thus hit by provisions of section 13(3)(c) of the Act. 8. The ld.CIT(A) has discussed the issue at length in light of certain judicial precedents including decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse, 259 ITR 280 and the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Fr. Mullers Charitable Institution, (363 ITR 230) and held that once there is a violation referred to in section 13(1)(c) r.w.s. 13(2) of the Act, then the Trust is not entitled to exemption u/s.11 of the Act. He further noted that although Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has…

Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berhampur vs. DCIT, Berhampur Circle, Berhampur

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 471/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berhampur vs. DCIT, Berhampur Circle, Berhampur

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 470/CTK/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 261/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Berhampur vs. DCIT, Berhampur Circle, Berhampur

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 469/CTK/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Ronald Educational & Charitable Trust, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 368/CTK/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 270/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 269/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 268/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 267/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 266/CTK/2019[2008--09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 265/CTK/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 264/CTK/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 263/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

Roland Educational & Charitable Trust, Ganjam vs. Cheif CIT, Bhubaneswar

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 262/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.K. TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Goutham, CIT-DR
Section 10

…ngst many and only activity carried out since 1997 (supra) is in education only running for a period of almost 25 years as on date and 15 years upto last AY before us i.e. 2012-13. 7.6 Their lordships other decision(s) in DIT Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, [2003] 179 CTR 225 (SC), American Hotel case (supra), Queens Educational Society Vs. CIT, 2015 372 ITR 699 (SC) also applied “purpose” test i.e. as to whether educational institutions existed only for educational purpose and not for earning profits. Yet another decision law HARF Charitable Trust Vs. CCIT [2015], 376 ITR 1100 (P&H) also dealt with an identical issue…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - Exemption vs. Association of Third Party Administrators

The appeal is dismissed with no orders

ITA/1071/2018HC Delhi20 Jan 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

Section 12ASection 260A

…ITA 1071/2018 Page 1 of 19 $~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 20.01.2020 + ITA 1071/2018 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - EXEMPTION ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Pratyaksh Gupta and Ms. Nupur Sharma, Advocates. versus ASSOCIATION OF THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATORS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ravi Kant Chadha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Siddhant Chaudhary, Advocate. CORAM:…

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

…if violations as mentioned in those clauses are attracted and strongly relied on the decision in the case of Paramasiva Naidu Muthuvel Raj Education Trust in ITA No. 2005/Chny/2012 dated 09.07.2018 as well as in the case of DIT v. Bharat Diamond Bourse [2003] 126 Taxmann 365 (SC). 4. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was posted for hearing on two occasions despite service of notice [AD on 3 I.T.A. No. 394/Chny/19 record]. Hence, we proceeded to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the ld. DR. 5. We have heard the ld. DR, perused the materials available on record and gone through the…

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

…Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income Tax, Chennai Vs. Working Women's Forum 12015163 ta.xmann.com 324 (SC) in which the SLP of the department was rejected whereas the Hon tie Apex Court has already held in Bharat Diamond Bourse reported in 259 ITR 280 (SC) that the benefits under section 11 and 12 of the IT Act would be denied totally in the event of any violation of section 13 of the I.T. Act.” 19. I have heard rival contentions on this issue. I noted that the AO opined that once the shareholding of the assessee in the four companies is held to be in violation of section 13 of the Act, then,…

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

…Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income Tax, Chennai Vs. Working Women's Forum 12015163 ta.xmann.com 324 (SC) in which the SLP of the department was rejected whereas the Hon tie Apex Court has already held in Bharat Diamond Bourse reported in 259 ITR 280 (SC) that the benefits under section 11 and 12 of the IT Act would be denied totally in the event of any violation of section 13 of the I.T. Act.” 19. I have heard rival contentions on this issue. I noted that the AO opined that once the shareholding of the assessee in the four companies is held to be in violation of section 13 of the Act, then,…

DCIT, Central Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2220/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

…226 ITR 211, that of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Action for Welfare and Awakening in Rural Environment (AWARE) vs. DICT (2003) 263 ITR 13 and that of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Director of Income Tax vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse (2003) 259 ITR 280. Reliance was also placed on a judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs.vs. Charanjiv Charitable Trust (2014) 267 CTR 305 39. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the authorities below. There are nine crucial issues coming out of the grounds raised by the Revenue, apart from certain minor quest…