THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION (MEDICAL)

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Charitable Trusts. Sections 14 to 59 governed by Chapter – IV of the Act deals with the income under the five heads of income enumerated under Section 14. The exemption entitlement under Section 11 of the Act is based on application of income and ‘permissible accumulations’ and the ‘balance of income’, if any, is treated as income which is not applied

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA REDDY JANASANGHA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Charitable Trusts. Sections 14 to 59 governed by Chapter – IV of the Act deals with the income under the five heads of income enumerated under Section 14. The exemption entitlement under Section 11 of the Act is based on application of income and ‘permissible accumulations’ and the ‘balance of income’, if any, is treated as income which is not applied

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI ADICHUNCHUNGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Charitable Trusts. Sections 14 to 59 governed by Chapter – IV of the Act deals with the income under the five heads of income enumerated under Section 14. The exemption entitlement under Section 11 of the Act is based on application of income and ‘permissible accumulations’ and the ‘balance of income’, if any, is treated as income which is not applied

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Charitable Trusts. Sections 14 to 59 governed by Chapter – IV of the Act deals with the income under the five heads of income enumerated under Section 14. The exemption entitlement under Section 11 of the Act is based on application of income and ‘permissible accumulations’ and the ‘balance of income’, if any, is treated as income which is not applied

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Charitable Trusts. Sections 14 to 59 governed by Chapter – IV of the Act deals with the income under the five heads of income enumerated under Section 14. The exemption entitlement under Section 11 of the Act is based on application of income and ‘permissible accumulations’ and the ‘balance of income’, if any, is treated as income which is not applied

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Charitable Trusts. Sections 14 to 59 governed by Chapter – IV of the Act deals with the income under the five heads of income enumerated under Section 14. The exemption entitlement under Section 11 of the Act is based on application of income and ‘permissible accumulations’ and the ‘balance of income’, if any, is treated as income which is not applied

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS vs. AL-AMEEN CHARITABLE FUND TRUST

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

Charitable Trusts. Sections 14 to 59 governed by Chapter – IV of the Act deals with the income under the five heads of income enumerated under Section 14. The exemption entitlement under Section 11 of the Act is based on application of income and ‘permissible accumulations’ and the ‘balance of income’, if any, is treated as income which is not applied

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI SRI ADICHUNCHUNAGIRI SHIKSHANA TRUST

In the result, all the appeals are

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Charitable Trusts. Sections 14 to 59 governed by Chapter – IV of the Act deals with the income under the five heads of income enumerated under Section 14. The 7 exemption entitlement under Section 11 of the Act is based on application of income and ‘permissible accumulations’ and the ‘balance of income’, if any, is treated as income which

SRI VIDYA MANOHARA TEERTHA SWAMIGALU vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Dilip B Bhosale

45 have to look to the provisions of the new Act, but only for the purpose of determining whether they indicate a different intention. (see STATE OF PUNJAB vs. MOHAR SINGH – AIR 1955 SC 84). The line of enquiry therefore, would be, not whether the new Act expressly keeps alive old rights or liabilities but whether it manifests an intention

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

SAVIKRUTHA CHARITABLE TRUST (R) vs. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice H.G.Ramesh Writ Petition No.65306 Of 2009 (T-It)

charitable purposes but only any attempt to create a perpetuity in favour of the settlor’s descendent the trust is void. (Reliance is placed on Shri Takurji Vs Sukdev Sing 1920, 42 All 494). Therefore, the assessee is imparting the education on the lines of business and no purpose of charity is being served. The assessee is having good profit

M/S SSJV PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. M/S ALLAHABAD BANK

In the result, the writ appeals are disposed in

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,R. NATARAJ

45 of List-I of the VII Schedule, it has excluded the enforcement of the Act insofar as the security created in agricultural lands are concerned without defining the said expression as the subject 'agricultural lands' is relatable to the respective entries under List-II and is a State subject. In the circumstances, we have to deduce the meaning

SRI U M RAMESH RAO vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

In the result, the writ appeals are disposed in

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,R. NATARAJ

45 of List-I of the VII Schedule, it has excluded the enforcement of the Act insofar as the security created in agricultural lands are concerned without defining the said expression as the subject 'agricultural lands' is relatable to the respective entries under List-II and is a State subject. In the circumstances, we have to deduce the meaning

AZIM PREMJI TRUSTEE COMPANY PVT LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:-

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

charitable entity belonging to the Azim Premji Group, to 4 be held as a part of the corpus of Trust. This gift was contemporaneously disclosed to the stock exchanges and this information was also disseminated to the public at large. This gift was also specifically disclosed in the audited accounts of the petitioner for the year ending 31.03.2014. The face

MASTER BALACHANDAR KRISHNAN vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,RAVI V HOSMANI

charitable trust with the object of, inter alia, establishing, maintaining and running of a model law college in India. The BCI Trust formed the National Law School of India Society—which was registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, comprising members of the Bar and legal academics to establish a leading national institution for legal studies. The Society approached

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. INDIA HERITAGE FOUNDATION

The appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

trust. It is also argued that the Tribunal has rightly set aside the order passed under Section 263 of the Act. It is also urged that decision relied upon by the revenue in the case of AMITABH BACHAN supra does not support the case of the revenue as in the aforesaid case, the assessee had withdrawn the claim

SRI B V ACHARYA S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA ACHARYA vs. SRI N VENKATESHAIAH

Bench: V.JAGANNATHAN

charitable trust called “Smt.Lakshmamma B.M.Sreenivasaiah Charities” and the trust was a registered trust and came into existence on 14.12.1995. It was also averred in the complaint that the trust was founded as per the will of late B.S.Narayan, son of late B.M.Sreenivasaiah and as per the trust deed, the complainant and one Sathyanarayana Swamy were appointed as the first