COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

12A as a charitable institution. It is also not disputed that the activities of the assessee are Date of Judgment: 17.07.2018 in ITA Nos.312 & 313 of 2016 Commissioner of Income-tax & another vs. Ohio University Christ College 14/47 charitable. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the expenditure incurred by the assessee in Hanover, Germany

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/s KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

12A registration is granted in subsequent years only? - 4 - 2. The assessee claims to be a Trust and re- assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 148 of the Act came to be passed for the assessment year under consideration whereby the Assessing Officer held that the assessee has not applied income for charitable

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

12A registration is granted in subsequent years only? - 4 - 2. The assessee claims to be a Trust and re- assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 148 of the Act came to be passed for the assessment year under consideration whereby the Assessing Officer held that the assessee has not applied income for charitable

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

12A registration is granted in subsequent years only? - 4 - 2. The assessee claims to be a Trust and re- assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 148 of the Act came to be passed for the assessment year under consideration whereby the Assessing Officer held that the assessee has not applied income for charitable

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

12A registration is granted in subsequent years only? - 4 - 2. The assessee claims to be a Trust and re- assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 148 of the Act came to be passed for the assessment year under consideration whereby the Assessing Officer held that the assessee has not applied income for charitable

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

12A registration is granted in subsequent years only? - 4 - 2. The assessee claims to be a Trust and re- assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 148 of the Act came to be passed for the assessment year under consideration whereby the Assessing Officer held that the assessee has not applied income for charitable

ADARSHA SUGAMA SANGEETHA ACADEMY vs. SMT. VRINDA S RAO

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice R. Nataraj

3. A proceeding under Section 92(1) of the CPC was initiated by the petitioners seeking leave of the Trial Court to present a suit against the respondents in Misc. No.548/2013. The petitioner No.1 claimed to be a Trustee of the respondent No.1 while the petitioner No.2 claimed to be a music aficionado and interested in the activities

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BOOK ROOM

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

3) of the Act to the assessee to show cause as to why the registration granted to it under Section 12A(a) of the Act be not cancelled. The Director of Income Tax (Exemption) by an order dated 20.12.2011 inter alia held that though the original registration of the Trust for wholly charitable

PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S. EMBASSY CHARITABLE TRUST

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

charitable and whether the application is made in consonant with requirements of Section 12A of the Act read with Rule 17F of the Income Tax Rules. The genuineness of the activities of the Trust is not a matter to be looked into at the time of dealing with the issue of registration of the Trust under Section 12AA

COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. MANIPAL HOTEL & RESTAURANT

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Trust 3/22 “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in allowing depreciation claimed by the assessee ignoring the fact that the entire cost of asset has been fully allowed as application of income under Section 12A of IT Act? 2. Whether the tribunal is right in dismissing the appeal preferred

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. THE KARNATAKA STATE

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S.G.PANDIT

12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”). For this reason, in the previous year to the year with which we are concerned and in which year the depreciation was claimed, the entire expenditure incurred for acquisition of capital assets was treated as application of income for charitable purposes under section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEM) vs. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION TRUST

Appeals stand disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

3. The assessee - trust is running various institutions offering degree/training in various academic courses in Bangalore and was granted registration under Section 12A(a) of the Act. Relating to the assessment years under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income declaring Nil income. Exemption was claimed on the entire income taking shelter under Section 12A

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION TRUST

Appeals stand disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

3. The assessee - trust is running various institutions offering degree/training in various academic courses in Bangalore and was granted registration under Section 12A(a) of the Act. Relating to the assessment years under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income declaring Nil income. Exemption was claimed on the entire income taking shelter under Section 12A

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. POORNA PRAJANA VIDYA

Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV,B.S PATIL

charitable Trust running a Gurukula, Sanskrit College and Vedanta institution which was preceded by execution of a trust deed. The assessee had claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Act for the assessment years 2008-2009 to 2012-2013. 5. The Assessing Authority however denied the benefit of exemption under Section 11 of the Act and treated the assessee

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. POORNA PRAJANA VIDYA

Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV,B.S PATIL

charitable Trust running a Gurukula, Sanskrit College and Vedanta institution which was preceded by execution of a trust deed. The assessee had claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Act for the assessment years 2008-2009 to 2012-2013. 5. The Assessing Authority however denied the benefit of exemption under Section 11 of the Act and treated the assessee

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. POORNA PRAJANA VIDYA

Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV,B.S PATIL

charitable Trust running a Gurukula, Sanskrit College and Vedanta institution which was preceded by execution of a trust deed. The assessee had claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Act for the assessment years 2008-2009 to 2012-2013. 5. The Assessing Authority however denied the benefit of exemption under Section 11 of the Act and treated the assessee

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. POORNA PRAJANA VIDYA

Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV,B.S PATIL

charitable Trust running a Gurukula, Sanskrit College and Vedanta institution which was preceded by execution of a trust deed. The assessee had claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Act for the assessment years 2008-2009 to 2012-2013. 5. The Assessing Authority however denied the benefit of exemption under Section 11 of the Act and treated the assessee

M/S BANGALORE URBAN AND RURAL vs. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX

In the result, the appeals are allowed to the

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

trust was only for the benefit of milk producers societies and more of mutual concern and not a charitable entity by upholding the denial of registration under Section 12A 3