← All Phrases

“Section 11(3)(iii)”

Section References (mined)Section 11Section 11(3)(iii)3 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 11(3)(iii) is PCIT v. Wipro Ltd. (140 Taxmann.com 223), cited in 192 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 11(3)(iii)

PCIT v. Wipro Ltd.
140 Taxmann.com 223 · 2022 · Supreme Court
192
citing judgments

Exemption provisions under Chapter III, such as Section 10B(8), must be interpreted strictly, and any claim for such exemptions must be made in the return of income. The principles governing Chapter III (incomes not forming part of total income) differ from those for Chapter VIA (deductions in computing total income).

Munjal Sales Corporation v. CIT
298 ITR 298 · 2008 · Supreme Court
191
citing judgments

The Supreme Court approves the mixed fund theory, holding that no interest disallowance is warranted under section 36(1)(iii) if investments or advances are made from the assessee's own non-interest bearing funds, even when mixed funds are available. This presumption applies when non-interest bearing funds are sufficient to meet the investments.

Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona
89 Taxmann.com 127 · 2018 · Supreme Court
130
citing judgments

The claim of depreciation under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act for assets used by charitable trusts is permissible, affirming the Bombay High Court's view that such a claim does not amount to a 'double benefit'.

Chelmsford Club v. CIT
243 ITR 89 · 2000 · Supreme Court
100
citing judgments

Income arising from mutual activities carried out by clubs or associations solely among their members is not assessable for income tax, as it does not constitute income from a trade or business due to the principle of mutuality.

CIT v. V.P. Gopinathan
248 ITR 449 · 2001 · Supreme Court
66
citing judgments

Interest paid on a loan taken against the security of a fixed deposit cannot be set off against or reduced from the interest income earned on that fixed deposit. The Income-tax Act does not permit such netting.

Sharp Business System v. CIT III
27 Taxmann.com 50 · 2012 · High Court
53
citing judgments

A non-compete fee, being a capital expenditure, is not allowable as a deduction from income and does not qualify for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

IT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT
225 ITR 1010 · 1997 · Supreme Court
39
citing judgments

For funds to be considered part of a charitable activity, the predominant object of the institution must be charitable, not profit-making. Any surplus generated must be redeployed in charitable activities.

CIT v. Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd.
36 ITR 222 · 1959 · Supreme Court
37
citing judgments

Receipts derived from services rendered by an association to its members, which fall outside the scope of its primary mutual purpose, can be charged to income tax. Such services might otherwise be considered business income, but taxability depends on whether the assessee is brought within the specific terms of the relevant tax provision.

Judgments citing Section 11(3)(iii)