← All Phrases

“Section 11(1)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 11Section 11(1)(b)11 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 11(1)(b) is CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries (201 ITR 325), cited in 195 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 11(1)(b)

CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries
201 ITR 325 · 1993 · High Court
195
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report along with the income tax return, as specified in provisions like Section 80J(6A) or 80-IA(7), is directory and not mandatory. Substantial compliance is achieved if the audit report is submitted at any time before the assessment is framed or completed, and benefits should not be denied merely due to a delay in furnishing it.

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).

Sarvodaya Charitable Trust v. ITO (Exemption)
125 Taxmann.com 75 · 2021 · High Court
129
citing judgments

The filing of Form 10B for claiming exemption under sections 11 and 12 is directory, not mandatory. A delay in filing Form 10B can be condoned, and exemption cannot be denied solely on this ground if the assessee satisfies other conditions and shows sufficient cause.

CIT v. Dawoodi Bohra Jamat
364 ITR 31 · 2014 · Supreme Court
83
citing judgments

A trust's objects, even if based on religious tenets, can qualify as charitable for tax exemptions if its benefits are not exclusively restricted to a particular religious community or caste.

CIT v. Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association
140 ITR 1 · 1983 · Supreme Court
82
citing judgments

An object beneficial to a section of the public, as distinguished from an individual or group of individuals, qualifies as an object of general public utility under Section 2(15) and hence a charitable purpose. This applies even if the benefits are restricted to a specific caste, community, or professional group.

CIT v. Xavier Kelavani Mandal (P.) Ltd.
41 Taxmann.com 184 · 2014 · High Court
72
citing judgments

A charitable trust that substantially satisfies the conditions for exemption under Section 11 should not be denied the exemption merely due to a delay in filing the audit report in Form 10B, especially when there are discretionary powers to condone such delays.

CIT v. Mayur Foundation
274 ITR 562 · 2005 · High Court
68
citing judgments

The Gujarat High Court held that Form No. 10, for exercising the option under section 11(2) to accumulate income, can be submitted during assessment proceedings, including before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which is a continuation of assessment proceedings. Such submission constitutes sufficient compliance for claiming exemption under section 11.

Association of Indian Panelboard Manufacturer v. DCIT
157 Taxmann.com 550 · 2023 · High Court
63
citing judgments

An assessee claiming exemption must follow the procedure in CBDT Circular No. 2/2020 by filing a condonation application under section 119(2)(b) with the CIT for the belated submission of an audit report. The merits of the exemption claim are considered only after such condonation of delay is granted.

Judgments citing Section 11(1)(b)

Baljeevan Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exem. Ward 1(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1872/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1872/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Bal Jeevan Trust बिधम/ Ito (E), Ward-1(1) A/14, Sterling Apartments, Piramal Chamber, Lal Vs. Peddar Road, Mumbai- Baug, Parel, Mumbai- 400026. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatb2973M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri J. D. Mistri Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 15.03.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Not Allowing The Accumulation Of Rs.30 Lakhs As Per Section 11(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Read With Rule 17 Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 (Hereinafter “The Rules”).

For Appellant: Shri J. D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12A

said money had been invested in the specified securities. The Commissioner (Appeals), thus, held that the assessed was entitled to exemption under Section 11(1)(b) of the Act. 4. Being dissatisfied, the Revenue carried the matter in appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal has affirmed the view taken

Cancare Trust, Mumbai vs. The Comm of Income Tax (Appeal) NFAC, Mumbai

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

ITA 1155/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1155/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16) Cancare Trust बिधम/ The Commissioner Of A-508, Byculla Service Income Tax (Appeals), Vs. Industries Premises Chs, National Faceless Appeal Dadaji Konddev Road Centre, Mumbai. Byculla (E), Mumbai- 400027. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaatm4606L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Mr. Vallabh Gokhale/Ms. Mrunmayee Kajrekar Revenue By: Mr. P. D. Chougule (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 03/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Trust Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (Nfac), Delhi Dated 23.03.2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: - “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Including The Total Income Of The Appellant Accumulation U/S 11(2) Of The Act Amounting To Rs.1,20,13,966/- Without Taking Cognizance Of The Form 10 Filed By The Appellant On 29Th Sep, 2015 With The Office Of The Learned Ao. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Treating Ground No. 1 Of Cit(A) With Respect To Accumulation U/S 11(2) Of The Act As Withdrawn.”

For Appellant: Mr. Vallabh Gokhale/MsFor Respondent: Mr. P. D. Chougule (Sr. AR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(b)Section 11(2)Section 12A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY