State of Kerala v. M.P. Shanti Verma Jain

248 ITR 587Supreme Court of India2001#13113 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

section 13(1)(b)section 13(1)section 13

Judgments citing State of Kerala v. M.P. Shanti Verma Jain

DASHA SHRIMALI BETAILS GNATI SURAKSHA SAMITI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1422/AHD/2019[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2024

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmeddasha Shrimali Betails Gnati The Commissioner Of Income Tax Suraksha Samiti, (Exemption), C/O. Neptun House, Ahmedabad. (Godown) Basement, Shre Krishna Shopping Centre, Opp. Aidorado Hotel, Vs. Mithakhali, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad – 380 009. [Pan – Aabtd 4797 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S.N. Divetia & Shri Samir Vora, Ars. Revenue By Shri. Durga Dutt, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 06.03.2024

Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)

…n case of Amreli Modh Vanik Community Property vs. CIT (Exemption) (2023) 150 taxmann.com 179 (Rajkot Tribunal), Shri Gurudwara Sahib Parbhandhan Committee vs. CIT (Exemptions) (023) 150 taxmann.com 181 (Amritsar Tribunal), Ghulam Mohidin Trust vs. CIT (2001) 248 ITR 587 (J&K High Court) 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(E) has not taken cognisance of the objects of the assessee Trust and has observed that the assessee has made only part compliance and, therefore, all the relevant documents has not been taken into cons…

ARULMIGU ATHI KARUMAPURAM SELLANDIAMMAN KUDIPPAATTUKARARKAL SEVA TRUST,NAMAKKAL vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

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

ITA 705/CHNY/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 May 2023

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.705/Chny/2018 Arulmigu Aathi Karumapuram The Commissioner Of Sellandiamman Kudipaattukarakal Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions), Seva Trust, C/O Shri N. Chennai – 600 034. Subramaniyan, Advocate, 478, New Addl. Law Chambers, High Court Campus, Chennai 600 104. [Pan: Aafta7759M] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri N. Subrmaniyan, Advocate : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri M. Rajan, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 07.03.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai Dated 29.12.2017 Passed Under Section 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: A. That The Order Of The Learned Cit(E) Is Erroneous In Law & Is Against The Principles Of Natural Justice. B. The Learned Cit(E) Erred In Not Considering The Grounds Of Appeal, Written Submissions & The Decisions In Proper Perspective. C. The Learned Cit (E) Committed Grave Errors In Not Taking Into Consideration That The Appellant Is Nothing But An Association Of Persons In The Eye Of Law

Section 12ASection 2(24)Section 2(31)

…perverse as the Trust does not hold any property as held by the learned CIT. L. That the finding of the learned CIT(E) in paragraph 7 and 8 of the impugned order relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kerala Vs. M.P.Shanti Verma Jain (1998) 231 ITR 787 that the Sec.13(1)(a) of the Act is applicable to this case is patently erroneous as the said judgment is not at all applicable to the present case and the learned CIT has arrived at the said finding without giving any opportunity to appellant to point out the inapplicability of the judgment for the case on hand is against the basic principles of…

DCIT(E), CIRCLE- 1(1), NEW DELHI vs. INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, NEW DELHI

ITA 3057/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. Indian Evangelical Team Circle 1(1), 126, Mehrauli, Exemption, Andheria More, New Delhi New Delhi – 110074 Pan : Aaati0283M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(b)Section 143(3)

…nly on the ground that the assessee is a charitable society and there is a violation of section 13(1)(b) and the Assessing Officer has relied on the case laws of State of Kerala vs. M.P.Shanti Verma jain, 231 ITR 787 (SC) 1998 and Ghulam Mohidin Trust vs. CIT 248 ITR 587 (J&K) 2001. Ld. CIT(A) perused the orders of predecessors for assessment years 2007-08 (Appeal No. 37/2009-10), assessment year 2008-09 (Appeal No. 88/2010-11), assessment year 2009- 10 (Appeal No. 196/2011-12), assessment year 2010-11 (Appeal No. 299/2013-14) and assessment year 2011-12 (Appeal No. 570/2013-14) and assessment year 2012-13 (Appea…

ACIT(E), CIRCLE- 1(1), NEW DELHI vs. INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, NEW DELHI

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1691/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1690/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 1691/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Acit(E), Vs Indian Evangelical Team, Circle-1(1), 126, Andheri More, Mehrauli, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110074 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati0283M Assessee By : Sh. George Kashi, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.03.2021

For Appellant: Sh. George Kashi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, CIT DR

Section 1Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(b)

…e assessee mainly on the ground that the assessee is a charitable society and there was a violation of Section 13(1)(b) and the AO has relied on the case laws of State of Kerala Vs. M.P. Shanti Verma Jain, 231 ITR 787 (SC) 1998 and Ghulam Mohidin Trust Vs CIT 248 ITR 587 (J&K) 2001. The ld. CIT (A) owing to the orders for assessment years 5. 2007-08 (Appeal No. 37/2009-10), assessment year 2008-09 (Appeal No. 88/2010-11), assessment year 2009-10 (Appeal No. 196/2011-12), assessment year 2010-11 (Appeal No. 299/2013- 14) and assessment year 2011-12 (Appeal No. 570/2013-14), assessment year 2012-13 (Appeal No. 6/20…

ACIT(E), CIRCLE- 1(1), NEW DELHI vs. INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAM, NEW DELHI

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1690/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. George Kashi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Vanita R. Sharma, CIT DR

Section 1Section 11Section 13Section 13(1)(b)

DCIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI vs. NEW DELHI YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION (YMCA), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4983/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2012-13] The D.C.I.T[E] Vs. New Delhi Young Men’S Circle – 2(1) Christian Association Ltd New Delhi 1, Jai Singh Road, Connaught Place New Delhi Pan : Aaatn 1200 H Co No. 83/Del/2016 (A/O Ita No. 4983/Del/2015 [Assessment Year: 2012-13]) New Delhi Young Men’S Vs. The D.C.I.T[E] Christian Association Ltd Circle – 2(1) 1, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi Connaught Place New Delhi Pan : Aaatn 1200 H [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 07.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Adv Shri V. Rajakumar, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)Section 2(15)

…while it was promoting religion. The benefits proposed by the Association of providing relief to the poor and medical relief and education were constrained by virtue of the objects of the Association. Relying upon the decisions in Mohidin Trust V. CIT (2001) 248 ITR 587 (J&K) and CIT v. Palghat Shadi Mahal Trust (2002) 254 ITR 222 (SC) the Assessing Officer found that the activities of the Association were not genuine. 7. The Assessing Officer further analyzed the MOA and found it was not functioning independently in respect of the disposal of property which contained several restrictions. That showed that the…

MOTIWALA UPLIFTMENT SOCIAL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DIT (E), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant Trust is allowed

ITA 5213/MUM/2013[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2016AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: -

For Appellant: Shri. Mr. Vijay JoshiFor Respondent: Shri. G. Nanthakumar

Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)

…ccordance with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Kerala v. M.P. Shanti Verma Jain 231 ITR 787 (SC), CIT v. Palghat Shdi Mahal 3 Assessment Year: - Trust 254 ITR 212 (SC) and Hon’able High Court of J&K in Ghulam Mohidin Trust v. CIT 248 ITR 587 (J&K). 4. We have heard the rival submissions and also perused the material placed before us including the case laws relied upon by the parties. From the language of section 12A of the Act it is clear that at the stage of registration under section 12A of the Act the authority concerned is required to see whether the application is made in accor…

JSK CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DIT (E), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5104/MUM/2013[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2016AY 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johri

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(b)

…t disqualified on the ground that it is for the benefit of a particular religious community. Reliance is placed in this regard on the judicial precedents in the cases of State of Kerala v. M.P. Shanti Verma Jain 231 ITR 787 (SC) and Gulam Mohidin Trust v. CIT 248 ITR 587 (J&K). It is notable that both sections 11 and 12 use the expression "charitable or religious purposes" which cannot be read or interpreted to mean "charitable and religious purposes". The purpose of seeking registration is to avail of exemption under Sections 11 and 12. Given its mixed objects, the applicant will not be able to have the benefit…