DIT v. Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram

357 ITR 731High Court2013#3376 most cited

What is DIT v. Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram authority for?

Donations made for a specific purpose are considered capital in nature and cannot be applied for charitable or religious purposes, thus not being deemed income from property for the purposes of Section 11 of the Income Tax Act.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

DIT v. Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram · 357 ITR 731 · corpus donation · capital receipt · charitable purpose · section 11 · donation for specific purpose

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12Section 2(15)Section 13(1)(d)Section 10(34)Section 11(5)Section 12A(a)

Issues it is cited on

section 11(1)(d)public servantsection 10(23c)(iv)section 161section 13(1)(d)corpus fundsection 164(2)corpus donationsection 11(5)section 13(2)proviso to section 2(15)section 11(4a)

Judgments citing DIT v. Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram

Maharishi Markandeshwar Trust, Haryana vs. DCIT, Central Circle Karnal, Karnal

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed on both the grounds

ITA 1966/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1966/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 1967/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 1968/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 1969/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Ita No. 1970/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Ita No. 1971/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Ita No. 1972/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Maharishi Markandeshwar Trust, Vs Acit, C/O Rajiv Goel & Associates, Central Circle-15, 179, Bank Road, Ambala Cantt., New Delhi Ambala (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adkpn2266L Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Ca & Sh. Rohit Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.06.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Bhavnesh Kulsheshtha, CIT DR
Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12Section 12ASection 131Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. A.D. Jain, Vice President Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 1966/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 ITA No. 1967/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 1968/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITA No. 1969/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 1970/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 1971/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 ITA No. 1972/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Maharishi Markandeshwar Trust, Vs ACIT, C/o Rajiv Goel & Associates, Central Circle-15, 179, Bank Road, Ambala Cantt., New Delhi Ambala (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT…

The Mysore City Police Welfare Trust, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Mysore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1549/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(15)

…the material on record. The corpus donations for building fund is a capital receipt and cannot be brought to tax. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Director of Income-Tax (Exemption) & Anr. v. Sri Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama reported in (2013) 357 ITR 731 (Karn.) had held that in view of the language employed in clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 11, requirement is that voluntary contribution have to be made with a specific direction. However, it was held by the Hon’ble Court that the law does not require the direction should be in writing. 7.1 The Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Bank of Ind…

The Mysore City Police Welfare Trust, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Mysore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1548/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(15)

…the material on record. The corpus donations for building fund is a capital receipt and cannot be brought to tax. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Director of Income-Tax (Exemption) & Anr. v. Sri Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama reported in (2013) 357 ITR 731 (Karn.) had held that in view of the language employed in clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 11, requirement is that voluntary contribution have to be made with a specific direction. However, it was held by the Hon’ble Court that the law does not require the direction should be in writing. 7.1 The Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Bank of Ind…

Mysore City Police Welfare Trust, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Mysore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1547/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.V.Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(15)

…the material on record. The corpus donations for building fund is a capital receipt and cannot be brought to tax. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Director of Income-Tax (Exemption) & Anr. v. Sri Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama reported in (2013) 357 ITR 731 (Karn.) had held that in view of the language employed in clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 11, requirement is that voluntary contribution have to be made with a specific direction. However, it was held by the Hon’ble Court that the law does not require the direction should be in writing. 7.1 The Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Bank of Ind…

Sir Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemption), Mumbai

ITA 773/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 773/मुं/2021 (िन.व.2016-17) Sir Ratan Tata Trust, Bombay House, 24, Homi Modi Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001. Pan: Aaats1013P ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Cit (Exemptions), Room No.617, 6Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. Sukhsagar Syal, Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Amol Kirtane, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 15/12/2021 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 16/02/2022 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: Sh. Sukhsagar Syal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amol Kirtane, CIT-DR
Section 11(5)Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई पीठ “डी ”, मुंबई "ी जी. एस. प"ू,अ"" एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं. 773/मुं/2021 (िन.व.2016-17) Sir Ratan Tata Trust, Bombay House, 24, Homi Modi Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001. PAN: AAATS1013P ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. CIT (Exemptions), Room No.617, 6th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant by : Sh. Sukhsagar Syal, Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent by : Sh. Amol Kirtane, C…

J.R.D Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (E), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3738/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2020AY 2014-15
Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 263

…the corpus, and, as such, the provisions of Section 13 (1)(d) were not attracted. Assessment year: 2014-15 Page 32 of 43 40. Explaining the scope of expression “corpus,” Hon’ble Karnataka High Court, in the case of DIT Vs Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram [(2013) 357 ITR 731 (Kar)] has observed as follows: 11. The word 'corpus' is not defined under the Act. We do not find any judgment explaining the meaning of 'corpus'. In the Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, the meaning of the word 'corpus' has been given as under: (i) body of writings, eg: by a particular author, on a particular topic, etc.; (ii) a body of written…

Ratan Tata Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (E), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3737/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2020AY 2014-15
Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 263

…the corpus, and, as such, the provisions of Section 13 (1)(d) were not attracted. Assessment year: 2014-15 Page 32 of 43 40. Explaining the scope of expression “corpus,” Hon’ble Karnataka High Court, in the case of DIT Vs Shri Ramakrishna Seva Ashram [(2013) 357 ITR 731 (Kar)] has observed as follows: 11. The word 'corpus' is not defined under the Act. We do not find any judgment explaining the meaning of 'corpus'. In the Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, the meaning of the word 'corpus' has been given as under: (i) body of writings, eg: by a particular author, on a particular topic, etc.; (ii) a body of written…

The Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax - (Exemptions ) Circle - 1, Mangaluru vs. M/S A. Shama Rao Foundation, Mangaluru

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1464/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm I.T.A. No.1464/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. A. Shama Rao Foundation, Income-Tax (Exemptions), Circle- 13-2-116, Hotel Srinivas Building, 1, Mangaluru G.H.S. Road, Mangaluru-575 001. [Pan:Aaata 1629 B] (Revenue-Appellant) (Assessee -Respondent) Revenue By Shri Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr) Assessee By Shri V. Srinivasan, Adv. Date Of Hearing 09/11/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 03/12/2020 O R D E R

Section 11(1)(d)Section 12A

…section 2(24)(iia) of the I.T. Act. The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments: 1) Trustees of Khilachand Devchand vs. CIT (172 ITR 382) (Bom.) 2) CIT vs. Trustees of Kasturbai Scindia Commission Trust (189 ITR 5) (Bom.) 3) M/s. Santhwanan, Trichur vs. ITO (357 ITR 731) (ITAT, Kochi) 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We need to examine the non-taxability of the corpus donations in assessee’s case despite inapplicability of the provisions of section 12(1)/11(1)(d)/section 35/10(21) etc. The Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Chandraprabhu Jain Swetamber Mandir V…

Umak Educational Trust, New Delhi vs. DDIT (E), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 4873/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Ms. Kanika Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(15)

…naturally benefit of Section 11(1)(d) of the Act cannot be given to the assessee. Assessee relied up on decision of dated 17.10.2011 of the Honourable Karnataka High court in the case of Director of IT & Ors. v. V. Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama reported as [2013] 357 ITR 731(Kar.) The issue before the honourable court was that even if the sum is credited to a specific account can it be considered to be corpus donation. Further, there are no details that how this money is utilized as held by the high court in para no 16. Thus, it does not help the case of the assessee. In view of this we set aside this issue to the fi…

DCIT (E), New Delhi vs. M/S Umak Educational Trust, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 4831/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Ms. Kanika Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 2(15)

…naturally benefit of Section 11(1)(d) of the Act cannot be given to the assessee. Assessee relied up on decision of dated 17.10.2011 of the Honourable Karnataka High court in the case of Director of IT & Ors. v. V. Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama reported as [2013] 357 ITR 731(Kar.) The issue before the honourable court was that even if the sum is credited to a specific account can it be considered to be corpus donation. Further, there are no details that how this money is utilized as held by the high court in para no 16. Thus, it does not help the case of the assessee. In view of this we set aside this issue to the fi…

Vidya Bharati Society for Education & Scientific Advancement, Kolkata vs. ACIT(Exemption) Circle - 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2398/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

…e defines the expression or term ‘corpus’ donation. However this term has been judicially interpreted by the Courts. We note that the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of DIT Vs Sri Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama [2012] 18 taxmann.com 37/205 Taxman 26/[2013] 357 ITR 731 while considering the meaning of word ‘corpus’ held that the donation for specific purpose must be in capital field and therefore cannot be applied for charitable or religious purpose and therefore cannot be deemed to be income derived from the property for the purpose of section 11 of the Act. In the present assessee/society’s case, it is noted…

M/S. Orissa Cricket Association, Cuttack vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Cuttack

In the result, ITA No.335/CTK/2017 is allowed and ITA

ITA 210/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Orissa Cricket Association Vs. Cit(Exemptions), Barabati Stadium,Cuttack-753001, Hyderabad Odisha, Pan No. : Aaaao 0319 F & Orissa Cricket Association Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Barabati Stadium, Cuttack Cuttack-753001, Odisha Pan No. : Aaaao 0319 F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan & D.Das, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Saad Kidwai, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/12/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri N.S.Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan & D.Das, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CITDR
Section 120Section 12ASection 254(2)

…dies provided by the BCCI to the appellant were without a specific direction or purpose so as to be considered as a revenue receipt by the appellant. Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of DIT(E) v Sri Ramakrishna Sewa Ashrama reported in 357 ITR 731 (Kar) held that: "The word 'Corpus' is used in the context of the Act. One has to understand the same in the context of a capital, as opposed to an expenditure. It is a capital of an assessee; a capital of an estate; capital of a trust; a capital of an institution. Therefore, if any voluntary contribution is made with a specific direction, it sha…

ACIT(E), Jaipur vs. Scholars Education Trust of India, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1087/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Nov 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varindera Mehta (CIT)
Section 10Section 11Section 12Section 12A

…made with a specific direction will not form part of the income but shall form corpus of the trust or institution. The ld. AR has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of Director of IT (Exemption) vs. Sri Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama 357 ITR 731 and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court while considering the meaning of word corpus held that the donation for specific purpose must be capital in nature and cannot be applied for charitable or religious purpose and therefore cannot be deemed to be 6 ACIT (E) v M/s Scholars Education Trust of India income derived from the property for the pu…

The DCIT(Exemptions), Cochin vs. M/S. Chinmaya Mission Educational & Charitable Trust, Cochin

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

ITA 330/COCH/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri P K Bansal & George George K, Jm The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Chinmaya Mission Educational & Tax(Exemptions), Kochi. Charitable Trust, Greater Cochin, Nettipadam Road, Ernakulam. ( Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…n the earlier assessment years. The contribution received for building fund has not been denied the benefit of section 11(1)(d) for the earlier assessment years. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of DIT(Exemption) vs. Sri Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama (357 ITR 731) had held that if the intention of the donor is to give money to a Trust and to utilize the same for carrying out a particular activity, it satisfies the definition of the word ‘corpus fund’. It was concluded by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court that the assessee would thus be entitled to the benefit of section 11(1)(d) of the Act. A similar view…

M/S.Santhwanan, Trichur vs. The ITO, Cochin

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 199/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin29 Aug 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri George George K., Jm & Manjunatha G. Am

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CDIT (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC) and CIT Vs D.C.Mills Pvt. Limited (387 ITR 64) (Ker). 2. In similar situations and contributions have been treated as corpus donations in the Cases of DIT(Exemptions) Vs Sri Ramakrishna Seva Ashrama (357 ITR 731) (Kar) Society of Anesthesiologist Vs. Income Tax Officer 32 ITR (Trib) 152 and DIT(Exemtpion), Ahmedabad Vs. N.H. Kapadia Educational Trust 136 ITD 111(Ahad). 3 3. The assessee does not have absolute control over marriage fund to utilize the same in any manner as deem fit. Hence the same is to be treated as corpus donations. 4. As per records…