PCIT v. MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION

415 ITR 361High Court2019#17887 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2021.

Read the full judgment

Judgments citing PCIT v. MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S. Green Wood High Trust, Bangalore

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

ITA 708/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.RFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Sudheendra, A.R

Section 12A

…tted that the assessee contested this issue before Ld. CIT(A) and the first appellate authority has allowed the claim of the assessee by following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Manipal Academy of Higher Education 415 ITR 361. 3. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that an identical issue has been examined by jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka in the assessee’s own case in ITA No.231 of 2018 relating to AY 2012-13 and the Hon’ble High Court, vide its order dated 14.8.2018, allowed an identical claim of the assessee. Accordingly, he prayed that the order passed by Ld. C…

Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Ward-2, Bangalore vs. M/S. Meerabo Global Foundation, Bangalore

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

ITA 721/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sri.Satish Mody, Advocate

Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

…assessee. The CIT(A) held that the assessee is entitled to carry forward excess expenditure. The CIT(A) followed the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pr.CIT (Exemption) v. Manipal Academy of Higher Education, reported in (2019) 415 ITR 361 (Kar.). 5. Aggrieved, the Revenue has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Departmental Representative relied on the assessment order and the grounds raised. 6. The learned AR, on the other hand, submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pr.CIT…

The Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Ward- 1, Bangalore vs. M/S. Global City Educational Trust, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 695/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2016-17 Ito (Exemptions), Vs. M/S. Global City Educational Trust, Ward – 1, 135, 135, Ramaiah Garden, Bengaluru. Jalakanteshwara Temple Street, 5Th Main, 6Th Cross, Malleshpalya, Bengaluru – 560 075. Pan : Aabtg 3599 H Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Respondent By : Shri. V. Srinivasan, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.07.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthis Is An Appeal By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 31.08.2020 Of Cit(A), Bengaluru, Relating To Assessment Year 2016-17. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Reads As Follows:

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri. V. Srinivasan, Advocate

Section 10(34)Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)

…the same ought to have been allowed. 8. The CIT(A) agreed with the submissions made by the assessee. In doing so, the CIT(A) followed the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of Principal CIT Vs. Manipal Academy of High Education 415 ITR 361 (Karnataka) wherein it was held set-off of excess of expenditure incurred over the income of earlier years against the income of a later year will amount to application of income of such later year and such carry forward should be allowed. 9. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Revenue has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal.…

Commissioner of Income Tax( Exemptions) vs. M/S Srinivasa Trust

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

ITA/79/2016HC Karnataka20 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 260

…d that the second substantial question of law has already been answered against the revenue by the decisions of this Court in 'CIT Vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE' (2018) 408 ITR 352 KAR as well as 'PCIT Vs. MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION (2019) 415 ITR 361 (KAR). The aforesaid submission could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the revenue. 4 3. For the reasons assigned in the aforementioned judgments, the substantial questions of law framed in this appeal are answered against the revenue. In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE RV…

Commissioner of Income Tax( Exemptions) vs. M/S Srinivasa Trust

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

ITA/80/2016HC Karnataka20 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 260