THE COMMISSIONER vs. JYOTHY CHARITABLE TRUST

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Trust 3/22 holding that the assessee is eligible for carry forward of deficit of the assessee to the subsequent years when the income of a charitable or religious trust/institution is required to be computed by applying general commercial principles without referring to the regular provisions of Income Tax as contained under Chapter-IV and as such while arriving

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

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: S G PANDIT,GEETHA K.B.

Section 2(15) of the Act reads as follows: “(15) "charitable purpose" includes relief of the poor, education, yoga, medical relief, preservation of environment (including watersheds, forests and wildlife) and preservation of monuments or places or objects of artistic or historic interest, and the - 8 - ITA No.100009 of 2017 advancement of any other object of general public utility: Provided that

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

Appeals stand disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

trust. The breach of Section 13(1)(c) being apparent, the Tribunal ought to have allowed the appeal filed by the revenue. The assessee collecting the capitation fee in the garb of voluntary contribution amounts to commercial activities. Such institutions cannot be considered as charitable institutions within the meaning of Section 2(15

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION TRUST

Appeals stand disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

trust. The breach of Section 13(1)(c) being apparent, the Tribunal ought to have allowed the appeal filed by the revenue. The assessee collecting the capitation fee in the garb of voluntary contribution amounts to commercial activities. Such institutions cannot be considered as charitable institutions within the meaning of Section 2(15

COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11 of the Income-tax Act meant “applied or finally set apart” for the benefit of the trust and that the allocation as made in the assessee’s books was enough to show that the relevant amount was finally set apart or applied for charitable purposes. We are unable to agree. It is not in dispute that there

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

TRUST Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX' (2020) 114 Taxmann.com 693 (SC). 6. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The Act provides for exemption of income of charitable institutions under Section 11 of the Act. Section 2(15

PR.COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SACKHUMVIT TRUST

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11 (1) (d) and 15% of income set apart in earlier assessment year cannot be construed as income of ht current year and 15% set apart out of the current year income is also excluded from income available for application?” 3. This Court in case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Date of Judgment

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KRUPANIDHI EDUCATIONAL TRUST

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Trust. 15. Placing reliance on the rulings of this Court in (i) CIT .v. Children’s Educational Society (2013) 358 ITR 373 and (ii) CIT .v. Father Muller’s Charitable Institution (2014) 363 ITR 230 (Kar.), learned counsel argued that no parameters set out in - 13 - Section

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. SHUSHRUTHA EDUCATIONAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Trust 3/27 the Tribunal is right in not appreciating the fact that the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Sections 15 to 59 are not applicable to the computation of income in respect of charitable

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust i.e., the assessee herein by following its earlier order even when the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Sections 15

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust i.e., the assessee herein by following its earlier order even when the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Section 15

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust i.e., the assessee herein by following its earlier order even when the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Sections 15

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S YENEPOYA UNIVERSITY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust i.e., the assessee herein by following its earlier order which has not reached finality even when the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Sections 15

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MEDICAL RELIEF

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust i.e., the assessee herein by following its earlier order which has not reached finality even when the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Sections 15

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust i.e., the assessee herein by following its earlier order even when the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Section 15

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S YENEPOYA UNIVERSITY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust i.e., the assessee herein by following its earlier order which has not reached finality even when the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Sections 15

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MEDICAL RELIEF

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust i.e., the assessee herein by following its earlier order even when the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Sections 15

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S CHALASSANI EDUCATION TRUST

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

charitable trust i.e., the assessee herein by following its earlier order even when the normal computation of income under respective heads as envisaged under Sections 15