Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT

348 ITR 344High Court2012#592 most cited

What is Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT authority for?

The Kerala High Court held that charitable institutions claiming exemption under Section 11 are not entitled to claim depreciation on assets used for charitable purposes, taking a view contrary to most other High Courts.

164

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Lissie Medical Institutions v CIT · Section 11 Income Tax Act · depreciation charitable trust · charitable institution depreciation · Section 11(6) amendment · carry forward depreciation · accumulation of income · application of income · Kerala High Court depreciation

Also reported as

24 Taxmann.com 9209 Taxmann 19

Sections most often in play

Section 11 to 13 of the Income Tax ActSection 11(6) of the Income Tax ActSection 271(1)(c) r.w.s.274 of the ActSection 28 of the Income Tax ActSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 17

Issues it is cited on

section 11(6)section 10(23c)(iv)accumulation of incomesection 11(1)(a)proviso to section 2(15)section 11(1)section 251(2)section 10(23c)section 2(15)application of incomesection 32section 28

Judgments citing Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT

ACIT, CIR-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI RAJKOT DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD, RAJKOT

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 188/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.188/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Vs. Rajkot District Co-Operative Bank Tax, Circle-1 (1), Rajkot Limited Room No.502, Aayakar Bhawan, Jilla Bankbhavan, Kasturba Road, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot- Opp: Chaudhary High School, 360001 Rajkot 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaar0564K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.Dr : 09/06 /2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08 /2025

For Appellant: Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.188/RJT/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) Assistant Commissioner of Income- Vs. Rajkot District Co-Operative Bank tax, Circle-1 (1), Rajkot Limited Room No.502, Aayakar Bhawan, Jilla Bankbhavan, Kasturba Road, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot- Opp: Chaudhary High School, 360001 Rajkot 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAAAR0564K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri…

MAROL EDUCATION ACADEMY,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS WARD - 2(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1575/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vipul ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Kavita P. Kaushik
Section 10Section 11(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263

…\n3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken\nthe aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High\nCourt of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie\nMedical Institutions v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209\nTaxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344'.\n4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature,\nrealising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in\nthe Income-tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of\nthe Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective\nfrom the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court\nhas taken the view and rightly so, t…

KAMAL CLEARING AND FORWARDING AGENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(3)(3), , MUMBAI

ITA 1575/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA ( (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vipul ShahFor Respondent: Smt. Kavita P. Kaushik
Section 10Section 11(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263

…same. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344'. 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income-tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that th…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1123/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

…ame. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in ‘Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344.’ 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realizing that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that the…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(3), EXEMPTION , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 499/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…me. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in ‘Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344.’ 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realizing that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that the…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIA FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3),EXEMPT, KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1230/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ame. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in ‘Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344.’ 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realizing that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that the…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1229/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ame. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in ‘Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344.’ 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realizing that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that the…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1228/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ame. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in ‘Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344.’ 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realizing that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that the…

SMT.SULOCHANADEVI SINGHANIA SCHOOL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (EXEM)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3713/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: S/Shri Nitesh Joshi & Hitesh TrivediFor Respondent: Dr Kishore Dhule- CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 28Section 6

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “G”, MUMBAI Before Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’ble President & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’ble Accountant Member ITA No. 3713/Mum/2023 for Assessment Year 2015-16 Smt. Sulochanadevi Singhania DCIT (EXEM)-2(1), School Trust, Mumbai Vs. 1st Floor, New Hind House, N M Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001. PAN AAATS2146P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : S/Shri Nitesh Joshi & Hitesh Trivedi Respondent By : Dr Kishore Dhule- CIT DR Date of Hearing :04.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 10.04.2024 O R D E R Per Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang: This appeal by t…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 906/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ame. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in ‘Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344.’ 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realizing that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that the…

INDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-1(1), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

ITA 934/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpalyadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

…ame. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in ‘Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344.’ 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realizing that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that the…

INDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-1(1), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

ITA 933/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpalyadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

…ame. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in ‘Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344.’ 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realizing that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that the…

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 444/JPR/2023[2014- 15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2023

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (FCA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35Section 35(2)

…same. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344'. 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income-tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that th…

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 443/JPR/2023[2013- 14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2023

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (FCA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35Section 35(2)

…same. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344'. 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income-tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that th…

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 442/JPR/2023[2012- 13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2023

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (FCA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35Section 35(2)

…same. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344'. 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income-tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that th…

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 441/JPR/2023[2011- 12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2023

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (FCA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35Section 35(2)

…same. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344'. 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income-tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that th…

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 440/JPR/2023[2006- 07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2023

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (FCA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35Section 35(2)

…same. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344'. 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income-tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, that th…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THE WILLINGDON CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

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

ITA 587/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.587/Chny/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. The Willingdon Charitable Trust, Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai Rani Seethai Hall, No. 603, Anna Salai, Circle, Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe Chennai 600 006. Building, Iii Floor, 121, M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaatt0683N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 17, Chennai, Dated 12.12.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: Ground No.1 1. The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) Is Contrary To The Law & Facts Of The Case. Ground No:2: 2.1 The Id Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Assessee Is Eligible For Exemption U/S 11 Of The Act & Not Hit By The Amended Provisions Of Sec.2(15) Of The Act, Under The Object Of "General Public Utility".

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 11Section 2(15)

…on of assets were treated as application of income; as held by the Apex Court / High Courts in the following cases (i) M/s. Nectar Beverages Limited Vs CIT 314 ITR 314.· (ii) M/s. J.K Synthetics Limited (65 Taxman 420) (iii) Lissie Medical Institutions Vs CIT 348 ITR 344 (Ker). (iv) DIT Vs. Ms/. Charanjiv Charitable Trust (2014) 43 taxmann.com 300(Del). 8.3 The Ld CIT (A) ought to have placed reliance on the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Rao Bahadur Cunnan Chetty Charities 135 ITR 485 (Mad) in this regard. Ground No.9: 9.1 The Id. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated that when the asses…

THE DY. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2,, AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. TARABEN VRUJLAL MEHTA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST,, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1544/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, AR
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 148Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

…preciation of Rs.55,32,155/- to the assessee which amounts to double deduction as 100% deduction was allowed to the assessee as application of income, he relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in case of Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT, 348 ITR 344 wherein the Hon’ble Kerala High Court has also taken cognisance of the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust, 198 ITR 598 (Guj). 6. As regards ground no.2, the Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the carry forward of deficit…

M/S. DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE -1, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 948/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…rities vs. DDIT [2012] 51 SOT 538 (Chennai); • DIT (Exemption) vs. G.K.R. Charities (2013) 214 Taxman 555 (Bombay); 9.4 The Learned Assessing Officer sought to rely on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT [2012] 348 ITR 344 to deny depreciation on assets which have been claimed as application of income. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court had relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Escorts Ltd. vs. UOI (1993) 199 ITR 43 (SC). It is submitted that the ratio of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Escorts Ltd. vs. UOI (1993) 199 ITR 43 (SC) is not applica…

Showing 1–20 of 164 · Page 1 of 9

...