CARMEL CONVENT ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, TRIVANDRAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes, and it’s stay petition is dismissed
ITA 689/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Mar 2024AY 2016-2017
Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. Seethalakshmi
For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)
section, are met.
Exemptions provisions, as indeed tax statutes, are to be strictly construed: CC v. Dilip
Kumar & Co. [2018] 6 GSTR-OL 46 (SC); Banarsi Debi v. ITO [1964] 53 ITR 100
(SC); Ramnath & Co. v. CIT [2020] 425 ITR 337 (SC), affirming [2016] 388 ITR
307 (Ker); Ajmera Housing Corporation
