GANGABAI CHARITIES vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

exempt under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The Income-tax Officer holding that the income earned by the trust was taxable, rejected the contention of the trust. On appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner reversed the Income-tax Officer’s order, holding that the trust was a charitable

M/S NEW NOBLE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY vs. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1

The appeals are hereby dismissed, without order on costs

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

charitable purpose of education, under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter, “IT Act”). The Andhra Pradesh High Court, by its detailed impugned judgment4, held that the appellant trusts which claimed benefit of exemption

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY

The appeal is allowed to the above extent

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

exemption on the ground that it is a charitable trust entitled to be treated as such thereby eligible for exemption

M/S.RADHA-SAOMI SAT SANG,SAOMI BAGH,AGRA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

exemption are: (a) the property from which the income is derived should be held under trust or legal obli- gation, (b) the property should be so held for charitable

ASSISTANT COMMNR., INCOME TAX, RAJKOT vs. SAURASHTRA KUTCH STOCK EXCHANGE LTD

charitable institution’ entitled to exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act from payment of income-tax. The assessee, therefore, made an application on February 10, 1992 for registration under Section 12A of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot registered 2 it on July 8, 1996. The assessee filed its return of income on October

M/S QUEEN'S EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY vs. COMMR.OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital, May Be Gleaned From The Facts Of One Of Them, Namely, The Queen’S Educational Society Case. The Appellant Filed Its Return For Assessment Years 2000-2001 & 2001-2002 Showing A Net Surplus Of Rs.6,58,862/- & Rs.7,82,632/- Respectively. Since The Appellant Was Established With The Sole 2

trust or institution that the activity shall be carried on no profit no loss basis or that profit shall be proscribed. Even if there is no such express provision, the nature of the charitable purpose, the manner in which the activity for advancing the charitable purpose is being carried on and the surrounding circumstances may clearly indicate that the activity

K.R. PATEL(DEAD) THROUGH LRS. vs. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX

trust for whole charitable and religious purposes its income was exempt from tax under Section 11(1) of the Act. Various

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX vs. GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD

Appeal stand dismissed with no order as to costs

exemption as Charitable Institution in respect of income derived from their property/business under Section 11 of the 1961 Act. This has been denied by the Department. The short controversy which we are required to decide in this case is: whether the Maritime Board is entitled to the status of a Charitable Institution under Section

U.P. FOREST CORPORATION vs. DY. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX

exemption of income which is applied for charitable purposes. Section 12 is in the nature of an explanation of Section 11. Section 12A provides that provisions of Sections 11 and 12 shall not apply in relation to income of any trust

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) KOLKATA vs. JAGANNATH GUPTA FAMILY TRUST

Appeal is allowed, with directions as indicated

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

Exemptions), Kolkata, aggrieved by the Order dated 18.09.2017 passed by the High Court of Calcutta in I.T.A No.7 of 2017. 3. The respondent herein, M/s. Jagannath Gupta Family Trust, is a registered Trust under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (for short ‘the Act’) and also 1 Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW. vs. U.P. FOREST CORPORATION

Appeals are allowed

charitable purposes and, therefore, exempt from tax by virtue of Section 11(1) of the Act, we find no such contention was raised by the respondent before the Income-tax Authorities. In order to take advantage of the provisions of Section 11 of the Act, a trust

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

EXEMPTIONS) ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ...RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. 1. By this application, the revenue seeks a clarification of the judgment dated 19.10.2022, delivered by this court, in CA 21762/2017 and connected appeals. The clarification sought is that para 254 of the judgment should be such as to “enable

DR.B.N.HOSPITAL & N.HOSPITAL RES.CENTRE vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI

The appeals stand allowed with no order as to costs

Charitable Trust registered with the Charity Commissioner. It runs full fledged Multi Speciality Hospital in Mumbai. On 1st March, 1988, Government of India issued a Notification No 64 of 1988 exempting

MANSAROVAR COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

Charitable Trust (iii) interest accrued/paid on the unsecured loans and (iv) provision for income tax (which was disallowed). Separate penalty proceedings were initiated under sections 271(1)(a). 271(1)(c), 273/274 and 271-B of the Act. 2.12 The assessees then preferred appeals before the CIT(A). Subsequently on 08th December, 2000, the writ petitions filed by the assessees

KERALA STATE BEVERAGES MANUFACTURING AND MARKETING CORPORATION LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)

Accordingly, the civil appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

exempt from Union taxation.   Therefore, in terms of Article 289, the Union is prevented from   taxing   the   States   on   its   income   and   property.     It   is   the constitutional protection granted to the States in terms of the abovesaid Article.  This protection has led the States in shifting income/ profits from the State Government Undertakings into Consolidated Fund of the respective States

INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (GWALIOR) M.P. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX GWALIOR M.P

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE

charitable purpose under Section 2(15) of the Act, they were entitled to claim registration as provided under Section 12 (A) of the Act. Since the application for registration was delayed in its filing, the appellant also made an application for condonation of delay in filing the application. 5. By order dated 13.04.1999, the CIT (Gwalior) condoned the delay

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. SINGHAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY

The appeals are dismissed with the aforesaid observations

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

charitable or religious purposes (Section 11) and income from contributions are exempt from taxation under certain circumstances. 4) It so happened that a search and seizure operation was carried out under Section 132 of the Act on one Mr. M.N. Navale, President of the 3 assessee Society, and his wife on July 20, 2005 from where certain documents were seized

ASSTT. COMMNR., INCOME TAX, SURAT vs. SURAT CITY GYMKHANA

Bench: The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Were Also Dismissed. Aggrieved Thereby, The Assessee Filed Further Appeals Before

exemption was claimed on the basis that the objects of the respondent-assessee are exclusively charitable. The assessing officer rejected the claim. Appeals filed before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) were also dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee filed further appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (’the Tribunal’). The Tribunal, by order dated 20th January 2001, allowed the appeals