“Section 11(4)(d)”
The decision most relied on for Section 11(4)(d) is Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr. (156 ITR 11), cited in 541 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 11(4)(d)
When there is a conflict between the decisions of non-jurisdictional High Courts, the view that favors the assessee should be preferred.
The broad definition of 'business' should not be applied when interpreting the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as the object and purpose of the section must be considered.
The circle rate prevalent at the time of entering into an agreement is to be considered for the purpose of Section 50C, as amendments to this section have been held to be retrospectively applicable.
Where only a part of a trust's income is diverted in contravention of Section 13(1)(c) or 13(1)(d), only that diverted portion of the income is taxable, not the entire income. This means tax should be levied on the relevant income or a part of it, potentially at the maximum marginal rate, rather than denying exemption under Section 11 for the entire income.
The benefit of accumulation of income under sections 11 and 12 cannot be denied for failure to file Form No. 10 during assessment proceedings, as it can be filed at any time during the pendency of such proceedings.
A charitable trust is not denied exemption under section 11 if it files its return of income within the time allowed under section 139(4) and files Form 10 electronically before the completion of assessment. The violation of section 13(1)(c) does not automatically disentitle the trust to exemption if the delay in filing is condoned or if the return is filed within the extended time provided.
Corpus donations are eligible for exemption under sections 11 and 12, even if treated as revenue receipts.
