← All Phrases

“Section 10(2)(vi)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(2)(vi)24 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 10(2)(vi) is American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute v. CBDT (301 ITR 86), cited in 111 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 10(2)(vi)

American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute v. CBDT
301 ITR 86 · 2008 · Supreme Court
111
citing judgments

An educational institution is eligible for exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) if it exists solely for educational purposes, even if it generates incidental profits. The mere existence of profit does not disqualify an institution from exemption.

Pinegrove International Charitable Trust v. UOI
327 ITR 73 · 2010 · High Court
56
citing judgments

An educational institution qualifies for exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) if its predominant object is solely education and not to earn profit. The mere generation of a surplus or profit from imparting education does not, by itself, disentitle it from the exemption, provided the income is applied for its educational objects.

Delhi Music Society v. DGIT
357 ITR 265 · 2013 · High Court
46
citing judgments

An institution systematically teaching music or arts qualifies as an 'educational institution' and is eligible for exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi), even if it is not recognized by any university or Board and does not award its own degrees or certificates.

Oxford Academy for Career Development v. Chief CIT
315 ITR 382 · 2009 · High Court
37
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) has no power to cancel registration granted under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act retrospectively, especially when there is no express provision in the Act for such cancellation and the order is quasi-judicial in nature.

CIT v. Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals
328 ITR 451 · 2010 · High Court
37
citing judgments

Assessments made under Section 153A are invalid if they are not based on material specifically unearthed during a search action on the assessee, and the absence of such incriminating evidence negates the justification for such assessments.

CIT v. Tridoss Laboratories Ltd.
328 ITR 448 · 2010 · High Court
35
citing judgments

Deductions under Chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, such as Section 80-IA, are to be calculated and allowed with reference to the assessee's gross total income, not just business income.

CRL.A. 124/2013 & ORS. Page 344 of 400 State of Madhya Pradesh v. Sheetla Sahai and Ors.
8 SCC 47 · 2015 · Reported
35
citing judgments

Sanction for prosecution under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is required for public servants who were or are in service, distinguishing it from Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which does not require sanction for those who have ceased to be public servants.

Tribune Trist v. CIT
390 ITR 547 · 2017 · High Court
33
citing judgments

The proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act cannot be invoked against city improvement trusts if their activities are not in the nature of trade, commerce, or business, even if they generate surplus or sell developed plots.

Judgments citing Section 10(2)(vi)

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.276/Del

ITA 1001/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rahul PrabhakarFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Maurya, CIT
Section 115JSection 14A

assessee. In Machinery Manufacturers Corporation Ltd. v. CIT [1957] 31 ITR 203 (Bom), it was observed that the expression "used" in section 10(2)(vi) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as "the old Act"), corresponding to section 32 of the Act has to be given

M/S Titanor Components Ltd vs. CIT & Anr

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 190 / 2002HC Delhi22 Dec 2014
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 260A

been held by the Privy Council in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Buckingham & Carnatic Co. Ltd., that the word assessee in section 10(2)(vi) refers to the person who owns the property in question and who is being assessed and not the predecessor and depreciation allowance

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Insilco Limited

In the result, the question of law framed by us is answered in favour

ITA - 1156 / 2008HC Delhi27 Feb 2009

Bench: The Tribunal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred 2009:Dhc:678-Db

For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata Bansal, Mr Sanjeev Rajpal & Mr MohanFor Respondent: Mr V.P. Gupta & Mr Basant Kumar

allowed…..” 17.1 The Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT vs Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe; (1937) 5 ITR 621, in the context of Section 10(2)(vi) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, which is pari materia of Section 32 of the Act, while considering whether an assessee ... depreciation in respect of factory which had not been employed in the work of ginning, interpreted the word „used‟ as found in Section 10(2)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 as follows:- “ But I think that the word “used” in this section may be given a wider meaning

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Insilco Ltd

In the result, the question of law framed by us is answered in favour

ITA - 873 / 2008HC Delhi27 Feb 2009

Bench: The Tribunal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred 2009:Dhc:679-Db

For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata Bansal, Mr Sanjeev Rajpal & Mr MohanFor Respondent: Mr V.P. Gupta & Mr Basant Kumar

allowed…..” 17.1 The Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT vs Viswanath Bhaskar Sathe; (1937) 5 ITR 621, in the context of Section 10(2)(vi) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, which is pari materia of Section 32 of the Act, while considering whether an assessee ... depreciation in respect of factory which had not been employed in the work of ginning, interpreted the word „used‟ as found in Section 10(2)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 as follows:- “ But I think that the word “used” in this section may be given a wider meaning