Karnal Improvement Trust v. ACIT

245 ITR 400High Court2000#5738 most cited
20

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

Also reported as

16 Taxmann.com 63

Sections most often in play

Section 11(2)Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 12Section 13(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 11(2)(a)section 10(20a)section 10(20)section 12aa(3)accumulation of incomesection 13(8)section 58section 13(1)(d)section 80ib(10)section 11(3)legal expensessection 13(3)

Judgments citing Karnal Improvement Trust v. ACIT

CENTRE FOR E-GOVERNANCE ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION, CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE

ITA 936/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri S Parthasarthi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)

…AO also referred to judicial precedents including the rulings of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust reported in 199 ITR 819 and Hon’ble Madras High Court in M.C. Muthiah . Page 7 of 30 Chettiar Family Trust reported in 245 ITR 400 to emphasise that the purpose of accumulation must be specific and cannot be general or routine. Since, the assessee failed to specify a clear purpose and merely stated broad objects of e-governance, the AO concluded that the assessee does not satisfy the conditions of section 11(2) of the Act. 7.7 Based on the above findings, the AO held that t…

ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY

ITA 182/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)

…ed on this issue. While the views of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of DIT(Exemption) vs. Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust(supra) have been followed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. M.CT MutthaiahChettiar Family Trust 245 ITR 400, some other Hon'ble High Courts like the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hotel and Restaurants Association 261 ITR 190 have held, while refusing to admit Revenue's appeal, that plurality of purpose of accumulation was not precluded, the purpose or purposes to be specified could not have been beyond the objects of the trust and Rev…

ROHILKHAND EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BAREILLY vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BAREILLY

In the result, both appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 181/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.181 & 182/Lkw/2024 A.Ys.2017-18 & 2018-19 Rohilkhand Educational Vs. Dcit, Charitable Trust, Bareilly Central Circle, Bareilly Pan: Aaatr6902J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assesseeby: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Sh. S.H. Usmani, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: [ These Two Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Lucknow Dated 19.03.2024 & 22.03.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, For The A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19, Dismissing The Appeals Of The Assessee Against Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “(1).That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Not Considering The Fact That In The Alleged Assessment Order, The Columns Of Name Of Assessee, Pan, Asst Year, Date Of Assessment & Section Under Which Passed, Are Blank. (2)That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Treating The Demand As Valid Which Was Not Computed On The Basis Of Orderthat May Not Be Termed To Be An Order Under Section 143(3). (3) That A Demand Of Tax As Computed In The Computation Sheet Is Without Jurisdiction Void-Ab-Inito & Is Liable To Be Annulled. (4) That The Ld. Authorities Below Have Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 736591857/-Comprising  Corpus Donation Aggregating To Rs 7,68,95,000/-, A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.H. Usmani, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 80G(5)

…ed on this issue. While the views of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of DIT(Exemption) vs. Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust(supra) have been followed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. M.CT MutthaiahChettiar Family Trust 245 ITR 400, some other Hon’ble High Courts like the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hotel and Restaurants Association 261 ITR 190 have held , while refusing to admit Revenue’s appeal, that plurality of purpose of accumulation was not precluded, the purpose or purposes to be specified could not have been beyond the objects of the trust and Re…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOCHI vs. YOGAKSHEMA TRUST, ALUVA

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 562/COCH/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Income Tax Officer .......... Appellant 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Old Railway Station Road, Cochi 682018 [Pan: Aaaty0284A] Vs. Yogakshema Trust .......... Respondent Keshava Smrithi, Chitra Lane, Aluva 683101

For Appellant: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Ms. Krishna K., Advocate
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12Section 143(3)Section 250

…the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust (1993) 199 ITR 819 as well as the judgment of the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Mutthiah Chettiar Family Trust (2000) 245 ITR 400. In other words, it is the case of the assessing authority that the purpose of accumulation is to be 'specific and cannot be general in nature’. The appellant rely upon the subsequent judgments rendered by various high courts. In the judgment of the Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Hotel and Restaurant Association, the very same issue as considered by…

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

ITA 22/LKW/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 12A

…the purposes as required by section 11(2). Placing reliance on the following decisions: a. Cotton Textile Export Promotion Council vs.1st ITO 4 ITD 642. b. Karnal Improvement Trust vs. ACIT, 16 taxman.com 63 (ITAT-Del). c. CIT vs. M.CT Muthaiah Family Trust, 245 ITR 400 (Madras). d. Sir Sobha Singh Public Charitable Trust vs. ADIT (Exemption) 79 ITD 1 (Del). the ld. CIT(A) held that in the case of the assessee, the purpose of accumulation of setting apart the income to attain the objects showed a lack of application of mind and specificity as prescribed in section 11(2) of the Act. He, therefore, held that if th…

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

ITA 21/LKW/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 12A

…the purposes as required by section 11(2). Placing reliance on the following decisions: a. Cotton Textile Export Promotion Council vs.1st ITO 4 ITD 642. b. Karnal Improvement Trust vs. ACIT, 16 taxman.com 63 (ITAT-Del). c. CIT vs. M.CT Muthaiah Family Trust, 245 ITR 400 (Madras). d. Sir Sobha Singh Public Charitable Trust vs. ADIT (Exemption) 79 ITD 1 (Del). the ld. CIT(A) held that in the case of the assessee, the purpose of accumulation of setting apart the income to attain the objects showed a lack of application of mind and specificity as prescribed in section 11(2) of the Act. He, therefore, held that if…

U.P HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW

Accordingly all four additional grounds filed by the revenue in Appeal numbers 532 & 533 of 2014, stand dismissed

ITA 535/LKW/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. G.C. Shrivastava, Special Counsel & Sh. Mazhar Akram, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 12A

…the purposes as required by section 11(2). Placing reliance on the following decisions: a. Cotton Textile Export Promotion Council vs.1st ITO 4 ITD 642. b. Karnal Improvement Trust vs. ACIT, 16 taxman.com 63 (ITAT-Del). c. CIT vs. M.CT Muthaiah Family Trust, 245 ITR 400 (Madras). d. Sir Sobha Singh Public Charitable Trust vs. ADIT (Exemption) 79 ITD 1 (Del). the ld. CIT(A) held that in the case of the assessee, the purpose of accumulation of setting apart the income to attain the objects showed a lack of application of mind and specificity as prescribed in section 11(2) of the Act. He, therefore, held that if th…

U.P HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW

ITA 534/LKW/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. G.C. Shrivastava, Special Counsel &
Section 11Section 12A

…the purposes as required by section 11(2). Placing reliance on the following decisions: a. Cotton Textile Export Promotion Council vs.1st ITO 4 ITD 642. b. Karnal Improvement Trust vs. ACIT, 16 taxman.com 63 (ITAT-Del). c. CIT vs. M.CT Muthaiah Family Trust, 245 ITR 400 (Madras). d. Sir Sobha Singh Public Charitable Trust vs. ADIT (Exemption) 79 ITD 1 (Del). the ld. CIT(A) held that in the case of the assessee, the purpose of accumulation of setting apart the income to attain the objects showed a lack of 19 ITA Nos.532 & 533/LKW/2014 ITA Nos.534 & 535/LKW/2014 ITA Nos.21 & 22/LKW/2019 U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parish…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW vs. U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

ITA 533/LKW/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 12A

…the purposes as required by section 11(2). Placing reliance on the following decisions: a. Cotton Textile Export Promotion Council vs.1st ITO 4 ITD 642. b. Karnal Improvement Trust vs. ACIT, 16 taxman.com 63 (ITAT-Del). c. CIT vs. M.CT Muthaiah Family Trust, 245 ITR 400 (Madras). d. Sir Sobha Singh Public Charitable Trust vs. ADIT (Exemption) 79 ITD 1 (Del). the ld. CIT(A) held that in the case of the assessee, the purpose of accumulation of setting apart the income to attain the objects showed a lack of application of mind and specificity as prescribed in section 11(2) of the Act. He, therefore, held that if th…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3), LUCKNOW vs. U.P AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

ITA 532/LKW/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 11Section 12A

…the purposes as required by section 11(2). Placing reliance on the following decisions: a. Cotton Textile Export Promotion Council vs.1st ITO 4 ITD 642. b. Karnal Improvement Trust vs. ACIT, 16 taxman.com 63 (ITAT-Del). c. CIT vs. M.CT Muthaiah Family Trust, 245 ITR 400 (Madras). d. Sir Sobha Singh Public Charitable Trust vs. ADIT (Exemption) 79 ITD 1 (Del). the ld. CIT(A) held that in the case of the assessee, the purpose of accumulation of setting apart the income to attain the objects showed a lack of application of mind and specificity as prescribed in section 11(2) of the Act. He, therefore, held that if th…

NATIONAL CHILDRENS FUND S5, SIRI INSTITUTIONAL AREA, HAUZ KHAS NEW DELHI,NEW DELHI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD EXMP 2(4) DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 3192/DEL/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.”

Section 11(2)Section 12A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORESHRI KUL BHARAT,JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3156 & 3192/Del/2023, A.Y.2016-17 & 2017-18 National Childrens Fund V/s The Income Tax Officer, 5 Siri Institutional Area, Ward (Exemption) 2(4), Hauz Khas, New Delhi Delhi PAN: AAATN5009N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh.Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Diwakar Singh, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 20/08/2024 Date of Pronouncement 28/08/2024 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM Since the issues involved in these two appeals are identical; hence, these…

NATIONAL CHILDRENS FUND 5 SIRI INSTITUTIONAL AREA, HAUZ KHAS NEW DELHI,NEW DELHI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD EXEMPTION 2(4) DELHI, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 3156/DEL/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.”

Section 11(2)Section 12A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORESHRI KUL BHARAT,JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3156 & 3192/Del/2023, A.Y.2016-17 & 2017-18 National Childrens Fund V/s The Income Tax Officer, 5 Siri Institutional Area, Ward (Exemption) 2(4), Hauz Khas, New Delhi Delhi PAN: AAATN5009N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh.Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Diwakar Singh, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 20/08/2024 Date of Pronouncement 28/08/2024 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM Since the issues involved in these two appeals are identical; hence, these…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JAMNALAL BAJAJ FOUNDATION

ITA/808/2017HC Delhi31 May 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(3)(c)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…is permissible for the Income-tax Officer to change the purpose of application of income, if the trustees state before the Income-tax Officer that the income accumulated cannot be applied 9 (2000) 245 ITR 400 Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:31.05.2024 14:45:18 Signature Not Verified ITA 808/2017 Page 16 of 24 for the purposes: due to the reasons mentioned therein. Though the word, ―utilisation‖ in normal connotation would connote spending of money for the purposes for which the income was accumulated, in the context of sec…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JAMNALAL BAJAJ FOUNDATION

ITA-808/2017HC Delhi31 May 2024
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 11(3)(c)Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…is permissible for the Income-tax Officer to change the purpose of application of income, if the trustees state before the Income-tax Officer that the income accumulated cannot be applied 9 (2000) 245 ITR 400 Digitally Signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:31.05.2024 14:45:18 Signature Not Verified ITA 808/2017 Page 16 of 24 for the purposes: due to the reasons mentioned therein. Though the word, ―utilisation‖ in normal connotation would connote spending of money for the purposes for which the income was accumulated, in the context of sec…

INSURANCE INSTITUTE OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT(EXEM) CIRCLE-1, MUMBAI

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

ITA 1610/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Insurance Institute Of India Acit (Exem), Circle-1, C-45, Block G, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai Vs. Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat 11174 R (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Vajani : Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand Revenue By : 25.11.2022 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2023 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) („Ld.Cit(A) For Short), Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year („A.Y.‟ For Short) 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Challenged This Appeal On The Grounds Of Disallowance Of Exemption U/S. 11 R.W.S. 12A Of The Act For The Reason That The Purpose Of Accumulation U/S.11(2) Specified By The Assessee Are Vague & General & The Purposes Stated Are Beyond The Memorandum Of Association (Moa For Short) Of The Assessee. 3. The Brief Facts Are That The Assessee Is An Institution Registered Under The Societies Registration Act, 1860, Established In The Year 1955And The Assessee Was Formerly

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VajaniFor Respondent: 25.11.2022
Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250

…on related to insurance and was in no way concerned with the real estate activities. The ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of the DIT(E) vs. Trustee of Singhania Charitable Trust [1993] 199 ITR 819 (Cal) and CIT vs. M. Ct. Muthiah Chettiar Family Trust [2000] 245 ITR 400 (Mad), which held that the purpose of accumulation should be specified to enable the A.O. to see if the accumulation was for the purpose mentioned in Form No.10. The ld. CIT(A) also relied on various other decisions. The ld. CIT(A) had also differentiated the decisions relied upon by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) held that the minutes of Administr…

ARHATIC YOGA ASHRAM MANAGEMENT TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS) WARD 1, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2920/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Justice P.P.Bhatt & Shri G.Manjunathai.T.A.No.2920/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Arhatic Yoga Ashram Management Vs The Income Tax Officer Trust (Exemptions) Ward-1, 31/14, Krishnaswamy Avenue, Luz, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. Chennai. Pan: Aabta 3404D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl.CIT
Section 11(2)Section 12A

…Trust. The learned CIT(A), after considering relevant submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon certain judicial precedents including the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs M. Ct. Muthiah Chettiar Family Trust reported in (245 ITR 400), held that purpose for which accumulation of income was sought to be made by the assesse for carrying out poor children education fund and medical aid fund is general in nature and suffers from vagueness. The assessee accumulates income for some vague reasons to explain shortfall in application of income for charitable purpose for the previous…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. THE MYSORE EDUCATION SOCIETY, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1346/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri A R V Sreenivasan, JCIT (D.R)For Respondent: None
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)

…t of Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) Vs. Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust (1993) 199 ITR 819 (Cal). The ld. DR has further contended that even the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Muttaiah 245 ITR 400 (Mad.) has taken similar view. Thus the ld. DR 4 has submitted that the Assessing Officer is justified in rejecting the claim of exemption in respect of excess accumulation of income. 5. Having considered the submissions of the ld. DR as well as perusal of the impugned orders, we find that the assessee has filed Form No.10 in respect of the…

DY. DIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S RASHTROTHANA PARISHAT, BANGALORE

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

ITA 898/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raodeputy Director Of Income-Tax (Exemption), Circle 17(2), Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S.Rashtrotthana Parishat, Keshavashilpa, Gavipuram Road, Kempegowda Nagar, Bangalore. … Respondent Pa No.Aaatp1699L

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, JCIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Y.K.Raghavendra Rao, Advocate
Section 12A

…s not contain specific purpose for which amount is being accumulated and the amount of accumulation was not mentioned. For this proposition, AO relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. M.CT.Muthaiah Chettiar Family Trust (245 ITR 400). 4. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) who vide impugned order allowed appeal relating to the claim of depreciation and carry forward of set off of excess application of income over expenditure in earlier years. However, the ground relating to accumulation of surplus within the meaning of sec.11(2) of the Act, was dealt with…

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)

…ourts are in favour of the revenue including the decisions of Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of DIT(E) Vs. Trustees of Singhania Charitable Trust (199 ITR 819) and Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs. Muttaiah Chettiar Family Trust (245 ITR 400).” 4. A. Disallowance of Faculty Teaching Charges payable to Ohio University (for both A.Ys. 2008-09 & 2009-10). 4.1 In the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had claimed application of income under Section 11 of the Act which included the faculty teaching charges to Ohio University towards academi…

VIDYANIKETAN EDUCATION AND CULTURAL TRUST,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed, while the stay petition by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1349/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P.George

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Shankar Prasad, K., Jt. CIT(DR)
Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

…s 11(2) of the IT Act for an amount of Rs. 75,00,000 and brought the same to tax. 14. On appeal by the assessee, the CIT(Appeals) upheld the order of the AO by following the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M.C. Muthiah Chettiar Trust 245 ITR 400 (Mad) wherein following the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of DIT Vs. Singhania Charitable Trust 199 ITR 819 (Cal), it was held that the purpose of accumulation has to be mentioned specifically otherwise the accumulation claimed can be disallowed. 15. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) the Assessee has preferred the…

Karnal Improvement Trust v. ACIT (245 ITR 400) — Cited in 20 Judgments | BharatTax