Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council v. 6th ITO

68 ITD 95Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1999#6532 most cited
18

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 12ASection 12ABSection 10(23C)Section 11Section 13(1)Section 80GSection 10ABSection 11(1)(a)

Issues it is cited on

section 11(1)(c)section 11(1)(a)section 12ab(1)(b)section 13(1)section 11(1)section 10(23c)childapplication of incomeregistration under section 12asection 12aasection 12absection 80g

Judgments citing Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council v. 6th ITO

ADITYA BIRLA EDUCATION TRUST,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 4474/MUM/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2025

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Soparkar (virtually appear), Shri Yogesh Thar, ShriFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (CIT-DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 13(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A No.4474/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: NA) Aditya Birla Education Trust vs Commissioner of Income-tax B-4, Aditya Birla Centre, S.K. (Exemption), 601, 6th Floor, Cumballa Hill MTNL Ahire Marg, Worli, Mumbai- 400030 TE Building, Pedder Ropad, Dr. PAN: AACTA4967C Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai-400 026 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Saurabh Soparkar (virtually appear), Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri Chaitanya Joshi & Ms. Sejal Nahata Responde…

SILA FOR CHANGE FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 4275/MUM/2024[--]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankar & Sila For Change Foundation Commissioner Of Income-Tax A-301, 3Rd Floor, (Exemption) Neelam Centre, 601, 6Th Floor, Plot 249A, Worli, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai- 400030. Mtnl Building, Pan: Abgcs5333L Vs. Peddar Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Maharashtra- 400026. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mandar Vaidya- AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule- CIT D.R
Section 12A(1)(ac)

…such student, it cannot mean that the such amount is utilised to apply for other charitable activities outside India. The Ld.AR placed reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in case of Gem & Jwellery Export Promotion Council reported in 68 ITD 95, wherein it is submitted that an organisation carrying out with exhibition and promotional activities outside India and money is spent outside India but nevertheless the ‘charitable purpose’ is served in India . He also placed reliance on the following decision in support of his arguments:- “1. CIT V/s. Dawoodi Bohara Jamat [2014] 43 Taxmann.com 24…

SILA FOR CHANGE FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 4274/MUM/2024[--]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Prabhash Shankar & Sila For Change Foundation Commissioner Of Income-Tax A-301, 3Rd Floor, (Exemption) Neelam Centre, 601, 6Th Floor, Plot 249A, Worli, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai- 400030. Mtnl Building, Pan: Abgcs5333L Vs. Peddar Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumballa Hill, Maharashtra- 400026. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mandar Vaidya- AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule- CIT D.R
Section 12A(1)(ac)

…such student, it cannot mean that the such amount is utilised to apply for other charitable activities outside India. The Ld.AR placed reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in case of Gem & Jwellery Export Promotion Council reported in 68 ITD 95, wherein it is submitted that an organisation carrying out with exhibition and promotional activities outside India and money is spent outside India but nevertheless the ‘charitable purpose’ is served in India . He also placed reliance on the following decision in support of his arguments:- “1. CIT V/s. Dawoodi Bohara Jamat [2014] 43 Taxmann.com 24…

AGASTYA INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, , BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 289/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Agastya International Foundation, The Assistant Commissioner Of #101, 1St Floor, Varsav Plaza, Income Tax (Exemptions), 12 Jayamahal Main Road, Vs. Circle - 1, Bengaluru – 560 046. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaata 3882 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Suman Lunkar, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Gudimella Vp Pavan Kumar, Jcit (Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 31.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.05.2023

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Gudimella VP Pavan Kumar, JCIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…the view of the learned CIT(Appeals) that merely because the payments were made outside India, it could not be said that the charitable activities were also conducted outside the country." ii) In Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council P. ITO, reported in 68 ITD 95 (Mum), the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal held as under “"33. A bare reading of the sub-s. i 1(1)(a ) di.:2.s• not leave us in doubt that the requirement under s. 11 is for applicatioa of income for purposes in India and it does not restrict the application of. income within the territory of India. The charitable purpose .for which the income should…

SREE VENKATESWARA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KRISHNAGIRI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD,, SALEM

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

ITA 1339/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1338 & 1339/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sree Venkateswara Educational Trust, The Income Tax Officer, 655/20 & 600, Jagilkathirampatti Vs. Exemptions Ward, Village & Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Salem. Krishnagiri District 635 206. [Pan:Aaits5220J ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem, Both Dated 25.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Passed Against The Order Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Well As Under Section 154 Of The Act. Against The Order Under Section 154 Of The Act, The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: “1. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Holding That Non-Allowance Of Expenditure Incurred To Earn Gross Receipts From A College & School Involves A Complex & Debatable Legal Issue.

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154

…to expenditure incurred to earn them. Expenses should have been allowed while computing taxable income. Income of a Trust to be assessed should be understood in its commercial sense and arrived at 3 I.T.A. Nos.1338 & 1339/Chny/19 in normal commercial manner (68 ITD 95 Mum, 135 ITR 485 Mad, 56 ITD 37 Del Trib, 125 ITR 531 MP, 162 ITR 612 Guj). 5. Application made for charitable purposes out of income earned alone is allowable, only if a Trust is registered under section 12AA and not the expenses incurred for purpose of earning income. 6. Observation of the Commissioner (Appeals) that "the appellant has not filed…

SREE VENKATESWARA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,KRISHNAGIRI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD,, SALEM

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

ITA 1338/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1338 & 1339/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sree Venkateswara Educational Trust, The Income Tax Officer, 655/20 & 600, Jagilkathirampatti Vs. Exemptions Ward, Village & Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Salem. Krishnagiri District 635 206. [Pan:Aaits5220J ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.12.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem, Both Dated 25.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Passed Against The Order Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] As Well As Under Section 154 Of The Act. Against The Order Under Section 154 Of The Act, The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: “1. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Is Not Justified In Holding That Non-Allowance Of Expenditure Incurred To Earn Gross Receipts From A College & School Involves A Complex & Debatable Legal Issue.

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154

…to expenditure incurred to earn them. Expenses should have been allowed while computing taxable income. Income of a Trust to be assessed should be understood in its commercial sense and arrived at 3 I.T.A. Nos.1338 & 1339/Chny/19 in normal commercial manner (68 ITD 95 Mum, 135 ITR 485 Mad, 56 ITD 37 Del Trib, 125 ITR 531 MP, 162 ITR 612 Guj). 5. Application made for charitable purposes out of income earned alone is allowable, only if a Trust is registered under section 12AA and not the expenses incurred for purpose of earning income. 6. Observation of the Commissioner (Appeals) that "the appellant has not filed…

COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE

ITA/312/2016HC Karnataka17 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 12ASection 260

…vs. Ohio University Christ College 11/47 by the assessee, squarely apply to the case on hand. In the case of Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council V. ITO, reported in 68 ITD 95 (Mum), the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal at para 33 thereof held as under:- “33. A bare reading of the sub-s. 11(1)(a) does not leave us in doubt that the requirement under s. 11 is for application of income for purposes in India and it does not restrict the application of income within the territory of India. The charitable pur…

M/S. NORTH WESTERN KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,HUBLI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), HUBLI

In the result, the assessee's appeals for Assessment Years 2006-07 &

ITA 275/BANG/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Smt. Pratibha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harinder Kumar, CIT (D.R)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 263

…lowing accumulation under Section 11(1)(a) of the Act on 15% of net receipts and not on gross receipts as claimed by the assessee. Reliance was placed on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council Vs. ITO (1999) 68 ITD 95 (Bom). 4.3.1 We have heard the rival contentions, perused and carefully considered the material on record; including the judicial pronouncements referred to. The issue for adjudication before us is whether the learned CIT (Appeals) was right in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee accumulation of income for application to the exte…

THE SYNTHETIC & RAYON TEXTILES EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1578/MUM/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12Section 143(3)Section 147Section 25

…curred abroad could not be allowed under section 11 of the Income Tax Act 1961. The learned authorized representatives for the assessee relied upon the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench ‘A’ in the case of Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council vs. 6th ITO 68 ITD 95 support of the proposition that where expenditure is incurred out of India for promoting charitable purposes in India deduction is allowable under section 11. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. Apparently, the decision of the Hon’ble AP High Court relied upon by the ld. DR related to a case where both expenditure and charitable objects we…

THE SYNTHETIC & RAYON TEXTILES EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1577/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12Section 143(3)Section 147Section 25

…curred abroad could not be allowed under section 11 of the Income Tax Act 1961. The learned authorized representatives for the assessee relied upon the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench ‘A’ in the case of Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council vs. 6th ITO 68 ITD 95 support of the proposition that where expenditure is incurred out of India for promoting charitable purposes in India deduction is allowable under section 11. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. Apparently, the decision of the Hon’ble AP High Court relied upon by the ld. DR related to a case where both expenditure and charitable objects we…

THE SYNTHETIC & RAYON TEXTILES EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1576/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12Section 143(3)Section 147Section 25

…curred abroad could not be allowed under section 11 of the Income Tax Act 1961. The learned authorized representatives for the assessee relied upon the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench ‘A’ in the case of Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council vs. 6th ITO 68 ITD 95 support of the proposition that where expenditure is incurred out of India for promoting charitable purposes in India deduction is allowable under section 11. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. Apparently, the decision of the Hon’ble AP High Court relied upon by the ld. DR related to a case where both expenditure and charitable objects we…

THE SYNTHETIC & RAYON TEXTILES EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1575/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12Section 143(3)Section 147Section 25

…curred abroad could not be allowed under section 11 of the Income Tax Act 1961. The learned authorized representatives for the assessee relied upon the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench ‘A’ in the case of Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council vs. 6th ITO 68 ITD 95 support of the proposition that where expenditure is incurred out of India for promoting charitable purposes in India deduction is allowable under section 11. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. Apparently, the decision of the Hon’ble AP High Court relied upon by the ld. DR related to a case where both expenditure and charitable objects we…

THE SYNTHETIC & RAYON TEXTILES EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. ITO (E) 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1573/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12Section 143(3)Section 147Section 25

…curred abroad could not be allowed under section 11 of the Income Tax Act 1961. The learned authorized representatives for the assessee relied upon the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench ‘A’ in the case of Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council vs. 6th ITO 68 ITD 95 support of the proposition that where expenditure is incurred out of India for promoting charitable purposes in India deduction is allowable under section 11. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. Apparently, the decision of the Hon’ble AP High Court relied upon by the ld. DR related to a case where both expenditure and charitable objects we…

THE INDIAN SILK EXPORT PROMOTION CONCIL,NEW DELHI vs. ASST CIT (E) II(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3328/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri N. H. Gajria, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Gaikwad, DR
Section 11Section 143(3)

…y covered by the following decisions which indicate that the amount spent outside India to promote the exports are deemed to have been applied for the charitable purposes in India. 4 (i) Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council vs. Sixth Income tax Officer 68 ITD 95(Mum-ITAT Bench) (ii) Handloom Export Promotion Council vs. Adi (Exemption)- IV, Chennai 62 taxmann. com 288-Chennai ITAT (iii) ADIT (Exemption) vs. The Synthetics & Rayon Textiles Export Promotion Council Mumbai- ITA 6639 and 6640/Mum/2011 Mumbai ITAT. The ld. counsel specifically refers to the order of the ITAT “H” 5.2 Benches Mumbai in the ca…

DCIT(E), NEW DELHI vs. THE ASSOCIATED CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 5862/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 5862/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs The Associated Chambers Of (E), Circle-2(1), Commerce & Industry Of India, New Delhi 5, Sardar Patel Marg, Chankyapuri, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatt4704C Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.11.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 28.08.2015 Of Ld. Cit(A)-40 (Exemption), New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(C)Section 11(1)(c)

…ugned order may be set aside by restoring that of the AO. 4 Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India 5. Ld. counsel of the assessee supporting the impugned order submitted that in the case of Gems & Jewellery Promotion Council vs ITO reported as 68 ITD 95 ITAT Mumbai on the similar issue of foregoing travelling expenses, the Tribunal has allowed the relief to the assessee on the ground that the foreign travelling expenses are for the purposes of promotion of trade and industry in India. Ld. Counsel of the assessee further pointed out that similar issue was also raised before ITAT ‘I’ Bench Delhi in…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. FEDERATION OF KARNATAKA CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY, BANGALORE

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

ITA 386/BANG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavanita No.386 /Bang/2016 (Asst. Year 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri DK Jha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri AC Raju, C.A
Section 1(1)(a)Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 15Section 154Section 70

…i Charitable Trust, 197 Taxman 170 (Del.) Trustees of Balkanji Bari (1979) 10 CTR (Trib.) 22 CIT Vs. Sacred Heart Church 278 ITR 180 (Guj) CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection 264 ITR 110 (Bom) Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council Vs. ITO (68 ITD 95) IT Appellate Tribunal Mumbai ITA No.386/B/16 4 Dy. Director of Income Tax (E)-I(1), Maharashtra Indl. Development – Mumbai Tribunal in I.T.A. Nos. 4777/Mum/2009 Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Matriseva Trust 242 ITR 20 (Madras High Court) 6. The CIT(A) held as follows:- The AR mentioned that as per section 1(1)(a) there is no restriction tha…

M/S SEVASADAN ORPHANAGE AND TRAINING INSTITUTE,BANGALORE vs. DDIT, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 971/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Nov 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S Sevasadan Orphanage & Training Institute, #347, Sarjapur Road, Koramangala, Bangalore-560 034. . Appellant Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption), Circle – 17(2), Bangalore. . Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S Venkatesan, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Rukmani Attri, JCIT
Section 11(1)(a)

…22 SOT 359 (Mum. ITAT) • CIT Vs. Shri Plot Swetambar Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (1995) 211 itr 293 (Guj.) • CIT Vs. Sacred Heart Church 278 ITR 180 (Guj.) • CIT Vs. Matriseva Trust (2000) 242 ITR 20 (Mad) • Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council Vs. ITO (1999) 68 ITD 95 (Mum) • CIT Vs. St. George Forane Church (1988) 170 ITR 62; 36 Taxman 42 (Ker.) • Trustees of Balkan J Bari (1979) 10 CTR (Trib) 22 (Bombay) • Chotanagpur Diocesan Trust Vs. ITO 19 ITD 175 (Patna) 5. CIT(A) concluded the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT Bombay in case of ITO Vs. Trustees of Sri Satya Sai Trust (33 ITD 320) have ITA No.971/B/15 4 als…

DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE ACADEMY FOR MANAGEMENT EDUCATION, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for both Assessment Years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are dismissed

ITA 1075/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2015AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.)For Respondent: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…es were also conducted outside the country. In this regard, the judicial decisions of the ITAT, Mumbai and Delhi Benches, cited by the assessee, squarely apply to the case on hand. In the case of Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council V. ITO, reported in 68 ITD 95 (Mum), the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal at para 33 thereof held as under :- “ 33. A bare reading of the sub-s. 11(1)(a) does not leave us in doubt that the requirement under s. 11 is for application of income for purposes in India and it does not restrict the application of income within the territory of India. The charitable purpose for which the…