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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

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

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

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

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

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

M/S DESHPANDE EDUCATION TRUST vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: S G PANDIT,GEETHA K.B.

trust under Section 12AA of the Act engaged in the activity of running coaching classes and training programmes for skill development and vocational training to students by charging fees. The appellant filed the return of income for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 declaring nil income on 26.07.2011 and 26.09.2012, respectively. The case of the appellant

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION TRUST

Appeals stand disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

charitable activity of education. The assessee’s returns were processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and scrutiny assessments were concluded for both the assessment years in question. During the pendency of the assessment proceedings, a survey under Section 133A of the Act was conducted at the assessee’s premises on 16.07.2011. Certain documents were impounded. Pursuant

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

Appeals stand disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

charitable activity of education. The assessee’s returns were processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and scrutiny assessments were concluded for both the assessment years in question. During the pendency of the assessment proceedings, a survey under Section 133A of the Act was conducted at the assessee’s premises on 16.07.2011. Certain documents were impounded. Pursuant

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS vs. ISKCON CHARITIES

In the result, we do not find any merit in these appeals

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

143(3) of the Act before 31.12.2006 as required under Section 153 of the Act. However, notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act on 31.03.2007 without completion of the proceeding pending on the basis of the return, which was already filed and therefore, the notice issued under Section 148(1) on 31.03.2007 is per se without jurisdiction

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. CMR JNANADHARA TRUST

The appeals stand dismissed

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

143(2) of the Act and undertook scrutiny of the payments made to the concerned entities in the light of Section 13(1)(c) read with sub-section (3) of Section 13 of the Act. 7.1 Before adverting to the rival contentions, it would be apposite to extract the relevant statutory provisions: "13(1) (c) in the case

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PEOPLES EDUCATION SOCIETY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

charitable society running an educational institution. The DIT (Exemption) registered the assessee – society under Section 12AA of the Act on 5.5.2003. By an order dated 12.5.2004, the Central Board of Direct Taxes accorded approval to the assessee – society for the purpose of Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act, subject to certain conditions to be fulfilled by the assessee – society

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (4) vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust out of the money when received by him. Once it is held that the amount was received as his professional income, the assessee is clearly liable to pay tax thereon. In our opinion, the correct answer to the question referred to the High Court is that the amount of Rs.32,500 received by the assessee was professional income

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust out of the money when received by him. Once it is held that the amount was received as his professional income, the assessee is clearly liable to pay tax thereon. In our opinion, the correct answer to the question referred to the High Court is that the amount of Rs.32,500 received by the assessee was professional income

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-1 vs. M/S RASHTREEYA SIKSHANA SAMITHI TRUST

In the result grounds 3 to 5 of assessee

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

charitable trust registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 19612. It has obtained approval under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act. For A.Y.2012-13, assessee filed returns of income declaring income as nil. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices under Sections 142(1) and 143

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME EXEMPTION vs. M/S CANARA BANK

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

Charitable Trust run by Canara Bank. The Assessee was registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] since 06.01.1982. 6. The Assessee had filed its return of income for AY 2016-17 claiming exemption under Section 11 of the Act and declared 'NIL Income". The Assessee's return was selected for scrutiny and the assessment proceedings

M/S NEW MANGALORE PORT TRUST vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. Veerappa

143 of the Act raised a demand of Rs.41,06,58,029/-. Thereafter the assessee filed Revision Petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax. The Commissioner of Income Tax allowed the revision by an order dated 27.9.2010 (Annexure-E) and directed the Assessing Officer to make fresh assessment in view of registration of the petitioner under Section

M/S NEW MANGALORE PORT TRUST vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. Veerappa

143 of the Act raised a demand of Rs.41,06,58,029/-. Thereafter the assessee filed Revision Petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax. The Commissioner of Income Tax allowed the revision by an order dated 27.9.2010 (Annexure-E) and directed the Assessing Officer to make fresh assessment in view of registration of the petitioner under Section

M/S NEW MANGALORE PORT TRUST vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice B. Veerappa

143 of the Act raised a demand of Rs.41,06,58,029/-. Thereafter the assessee filed Revision Petition before the Commissioner of Income Tax. The Commissioner of Income Tax allowed the revision by an order dated 27.9.2010 (Annexure-E) and directed the Assessing Officer to make fresh assessment in view of registration of the petitioner under Section