Vanita Vishram Trust v. Chief Commissioner of Income

327 ITR 121High Court2010#3833 most cited

What is Vanita Vishram Trust v. Chief Commissioner of Income authority for?

An institution must be established solely for educational purposes and not for commercial activities to be eligible for exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi). Pursuing objects other than education, or having objects that enable commercial activities, disqualifies the institution from such exemption.

31

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

Also referred to as

Vanita Vishram Trust v. CCIT · 327 ITR 121 · Section 10(23C)(vi) · educational purposes · commercial activities · exemption eligibility · objects of trust · charitable trust

Sections most often in play

Section 10(23C)Section 11Section 12ASection 12AASection 13(2)(g)Section 13(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

registration under section 12asection 12asection 12document

Judgments citing Vanita Vishram Trust v. Chief Commissioner of Income

SANSTHANAM ABHAY DAANAM,NANDURBAR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

ITA 950/PUN/2023[Not Applicable]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri P.S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Kumar Keshari
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

…Dal Vs. CIT (Exemptions) in ITA Nos. 2285 & 2286/Del/2015; V. Raghunath Das Damodardas Lohia Charitable Trust Vs. Director of Income-tax (Exemptions) (2015) 44 ITR (T) 161 (Hyderabad-Trib.); VI. Vanita Vishram Trust Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (2010) 327 ITR 121 (Bombay); VII. Ananda Social & Educational Trust Vs. CIT (2020) 426 ITR 340 (SC); VIII. CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Jagannath Gupta Family Trust (2019) 411 ITR 235 (SC). 17. The Ld. DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E). 18. We have considered the submission of the parties and perused the records. It is not in dispute that in response to notice date…

SANSTHANAM ABHAY DAANAM,NANDURBAR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

ITA 949/PUN/2023[NOT APPLICABLE]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri P.S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Kumar Keshari
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

…Dal Vs. CIT (Exemptions) in ITA Nos. 2285 & 2286/Del/2015; V. Raghunath Das Damodardas Lohia Charitable Trust Vs. Director of Income-tax (Exemptions) (2015) 44 ITR (T) 161 (Hyderabad-Trib.); VI. Vanita Vishram Trust Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (2010) 327 ITR 121 (Bombay); VII. Ananda Social & Educational Trust Vs. CIT (2020) 426 ITR 340 (SC); VIII. CIT (Exemptions) Vs. Jagannath Gupta Family Trust (2019) 411 ITR 235 (SC). 17. The Ld. DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(E). 18. We have considered the submission of the parties and perused the records. It is not in dispute that in response to notice date…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. THE CATHEDRAL VIDYA TRUST, MUMBAI

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

ITA 3292/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri. Ronak Doshi & Ms. Mahek SavlaFor Respondent: Shri. H. M. Bhatt
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)

…ction 11 of the Act. The fee is charging for fulfilment of its object and in support of his contention, the Id. AR of the assessee relied upon the following decisions; i. Queen's Education Society vs. CIT (372 ITR 699) (SC). ii. Vanita Vishram Trust vs. CCIT (327 ITR 121) (Bom.HC). iii. Tolani Education Society vs. DDIT (351 ITR 184) (Bom.HC). iv. Green Acres Educational Trust vs. DCIT (70 taxmann.com 347) (Mum. Trib.) V. Gagan Education Society vs. ACIT (10 taxmann.com 156) (Agra Trib.) vi. ACIT vs. Mahima Shiksha Samiti (79 taxmann.com 38) (Jaipur Trib.). Thirdly, that the rent paid by assessee to the Company…

M/S NEW NOBLE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY vs. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1

The appeals are hereby dismissed, without order on costs

C.A. No.-003795-003795 - 2014Supreme Court19 Oct 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 10

…educational purposes and not for commercial activities. (Oxford University Press v. CIT, [2001] 247 ITR 658 (SC)). This requirement would militate against an institution pursuing the objects other than education. (Vanita Vishram Trust v. Chief CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 121 (Bom)). Even if one of the objects enables the institution to undertake commercial activities, it would not be entitled for approval under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act. (American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute, [2008] 301 ITR 86 (SC)). It is only if the objects reveal that the very being of the assessee-society, as an…

UBAIDULLA EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION,RAJAGHIRI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS) , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3401/CHNY/2018[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Ubaidulla Educational Foundation C.I.T. (Exemption), Chennai 5/2, Jamalia Street Vs Rajagiri, Papanasam District - Thanjavur [Tamil Nadu] Pin -614207 [Pan: Aabcu6415D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 10Section 25

…ociety was running any activity other than educational activity, for mere existence of object not related to core activity exemption could not be denied. Similar findings were given by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vanita Vishram Trust vs. CCIT 327 ITR 121 (Bom.). Hon’ble Bombay High Court while holding so, also took note of the fact that the trust existed solely for educational purpose which was evident from the assessment orders for the Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2006-07. It noted that both these assessment orders which had been made u/s 143(3) contained a statement of fact to the effect that th…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KRUPANIDHI EDUCATIONAL TRUST

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA/47/2013HC Karnataka22 Oct 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 12ASection 13Section 260

…IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI I.T.A.No.47/2013 BETWEEN : 1 . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXAMINATION, C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE 2 . THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPT) C.R.BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/s KRUPANIDHI EDUCATIONAL TRUST CHIKKABELENDUR CARMELARAM POST VARTHUR HOBLI, OFF SARJAPUR ROAD BANGALORE-560035 …RESPONDEN…

KAKATIYA UNIVERSITY ,WARANGAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1749/HYD/2019[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2021

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonykakatiya University, Vs. The Commissioner Of Warangal, Income Tax Vidyaranyapuri, (Exemptions), Hanamkonda, Hyderabad. Warangal – 506009. Pan : Aaagk0334C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri E. Phalguna Kumar, Ar Revenue By: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2021 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit (Exemption), Hyderabad, Denying The Registration To The Assessee U/S 12A Of The Act Vide Order U/S 12Aa(1)(B)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 27.09.2019. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A University Imparting Education Within Its Territorial Jurisdiction & It Is Totally Funded By The Government. It Filed Its Application In Form 10A On 31.03.2019 Seeking Registration U/S 12A Of The Act. The Cit(E) Called For Various Details Observing That The Assessee Has Not Filed The Return Of Income For The Relevant Year 1 & Has Also Got Its Accounts For The F.Y. 2016-17 & 2015-16 Audited Only On 16.09.2019, I.E. Beyond The Statutory Time Limit. He Observed That Assessee Has Deliberately Not Filed Its Return Of Income & Thus Violated The Provisions Of The Act. He Observed That As Per The Amended Act, W.E.F. 01.04.2019, The Compliance Of Law By A Trust Is Mandatory. Therefore He Observed The Assessee Has Violated The Law & Therefore Was Not Eligible For Registration U/S 12A Of The Act. He Accordingly Denied The Registration U/S 12A Of The Act Against Which Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal By Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: Sri E. Phalguna Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 2

…aced reliance upon the following decisions. i) Hardayal Charitable and Educational Trust Vs. CIT reported in (2013) 355 ITR 534 (All.) ii) Ananda Social and Educational Trust vs. CIT and another in 426 ITR 340 (SC) iii) Vanita Vishram Trust v. CIT reported in 327 ITR 121 (Bom). 7. In support of his contentions that even if there is a profit element in the activities carried on by the assessee, such a violation may not be a 6 ground for refusal for grant of registration u/s 12A of the Act, he placed reliance upon the decision of the larger Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of T.M.A. Pai Foundation vs State Of…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEM) vs. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION TRUST

Appeals stand disposed of

ITA/231/2016HC Karnataka20 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 10(23)(c)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 2(15)Section 260Section 260A

…IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI I.T.A.No.230/2016 c/w I.T.A.No.231/2016 BETWEEN : 1 . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEM) BENGALURU, 6TH FLOOR, UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027 2 . THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-17(1), BANGALORE ...APPELLANTS (COMMON) (BY SRI JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADV. A/W SRI T.N.C.SRIDHAR, ADV. FOR SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADV.) AND : KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION…

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION TRUST

Appeals stand disposed of

ITA/230/2016HC Karnataka20 Sept 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 10(23)(c)Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 2(15)Section 260Section 260A

…IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI I.T.A.No.230/2016 c/w I.T.A.No.231/2016 BETWEEN : 1 . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEM) BENGALURU, 6TH FLOOR, UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027 2 . THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-17(1), BANGALORE ...APPELLANTS (COMMON) (BY SRI JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADV. A/W SRI T.N.C.SRIDHAR, ADV. FOR SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADV.) AND : KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION…

THE SARDAR PARTAPSINGH EDUCATION SOCIETY,MUMBAI vs. THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 487/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2021AY 2019-20
Section 10

…relevant activities (though factually it is not) deserve to be dismissed in limine. Reliance in this regard has been rightly placed by the ld. AR on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High court in the case of Vanita Vishram Trust vs. CCIT reported in 327 ITR 121 (Bom). 7 The Sardar Partapsingh Education Society 3. The second objection of the ld. CIT(E) is that the assessee trust had derived surplus in its income and expenditure account, the details of which are tabulated by the ld. CIT(E) in pages 11,12,13 & 14 of his order. Since surplus was earned by the assessee trust, the ld. CIT(E) concluded that…

DHARMAPRAKASHA RAJANAHALLI RAMASETTY EDUCATIONAL TRUST,DAVANAGERE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, DAVANAGERE

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

ITA 898/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Dr.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Council for DR
Section 10

…educational institution by earning income for the purpose of running the educational institution. In support of its claim, the assessee relied on the following judgments :- (i) Aditanar Educational Institution 244 ITR 310 SC (ii) Vanita Vishram Trust v. CCIT 327 ITR 121 Bom (iii) DDIT v. Shanti Devi Progressive Education Society 340 ITR 320 Del. (iv) CIT v. Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust [(1995) 212 ITR 456 (Ker.)] (v) Brahmin Educational Society v. ACIT [(1997) 227 ITR 317 (Ker.)] 6. The Assessing Officer did not accept the contention of the assessee and has not granted exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) by stating t…

SHARMA MODERN PUBLIC SCHOOL SHIKSHA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 462/JPR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: The Ld. Cit (A)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha (Addl. CIT)
Section 10

…Karnataka High Court in case of Geetanjali Education Society vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax (Exemptions), 223 Taxman 167 (Kar.) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Vanita Vishram Trust vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, 327 ITR 121 (Bom.) and submitted that so far as the assessee conducting educational activity only during the year under consideration, 4 Sharma Modern Public School Shiksha Samiti, Alwar. the mere fact that certain other objects were mentioned in the Trust Deed would not entitle the assessee for claiming exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. Th…

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 261/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…ssessee cannot be denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. He relied on the following judgments: 1) Pinegrove International Charitable Trust vs. Union of India & Others (327 ITR 63) (P&H). 4 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 2) Vanitha Vishram Trust vs. Chief CIT (327 ITR 121 (Bombay). 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is the violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mulle…

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 260/COCH/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…ssessee cannot be denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. He relied on the following judgments: 1) Pinegrove International Charitable Trust vs. Union of India & Others (327 ITR 63) (P&H). 4 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 2) Vanitha Vishram Trust vs. Chief CIT (327 ITR 121 (Bombay). 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is the violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mulle…

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 259/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…ssessee cannot be denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. He relied on the following judgments: 1) Pinegrove International Charitable Trust vs. Union of India & Others (327 ITR 63) (P&H). 4 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 2) Vanitha Vishram Trust vs. Chief CIT (327 ITR 121 (Bombay). 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is the violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mulle…

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 258/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…ssessee cannot be denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. He relied on the following judgments: 1) Pinegrove International Charitable Trust vs. Union of India & Others (327 ITR 63) (P&H). 4 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 2) Vanitha Vishram Trust vs. Chief CIT (327 ITR 121 (Bombay). 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is the violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mulle…

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 257/COCH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…ssessee cannot be denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. He relied on the following judgments: 1) Pinegrove International Charitable Trust vs. Union of India & Others (327 ITR 63) (P&H). 4 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 2) Vanitha Vishram Trust vs. Chief CIT (327 ITR 121 (Bombay). 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is the violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mulle…

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 256/COCH/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…ssessee cannot be denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. He relied on the following judgments: 1) Pinegrove International Charitable Trust vs. Union of India & Others (327 ITR 63) (P&H). 4 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 2) Vanitha Vishram Trust vs. Chief CIT (327 ITR 121 (Bombay). 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is the violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mulle…

M/S.KUNHITHARUVAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,CALICUT vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE-2, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are disposed of as follows:

ITA 255/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 10ASection 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)(c)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…ssessee cannot be denied exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. He relied on the following judgments: 1) Pinegrove International Charitable Trust vs. Union of India & Others (327 ITR 63) (P&H). 4 I.T.A. Nos.255-261/Coch/2018 2) Vanitha Vishram Trust vs. Chief CIT (327 ITR 121 (Bombay). 5.3 The Ld. AR submitted that even if there is the violation of sections 11(5) and 13(1)(c) of the Act, the assessee is only liable to pay tax on maximum margin rate and not on the entire income but only to the extent of violation of the above sections. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgments: 1) CIT vs. Fr. Mulle…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. VELLORE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, VELLORE

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas that of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2220/CHNY/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

For Appellant: Shri. A. Mahesh, C.A
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)Section 132Section 153A

…institution was established. Merely because an institution had earned profit that would not be the deciding factor to conclude that the educational institution existed for profit ... " Vanita Vishram Trust vs. Chief Commissioner of Income - Tax and Another - 327 ITR 121 (BOM) " ... the fact that a surplus may incidentally arise from the activities of the trust, after meeting the expenditure incurred for conducting educational activities would not disentitle the trust of the benefit of the provisions of section 10(23C) ... " Maa Saraswari Educational Trust vs. UOI (HP) - " ... Therefore, it is not as if the educa…

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

Vanita Vishram Trust v. Chief Commissioner of Income (327 ITR 121) — Cited in 31 Judgments | BharatTax