PRAKASH NATH KHANNA vs. COMMNR OF INCOME TAX

1) or sub-section (2) may, before the assessment is made, furnish the return for any previous year at any time before the end of the period specified in clause (b), and the provisions of sub-section (8) shall apply in every such case. (b)The period referred to in clause (a) shall be- (i)where the return relates

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

12 of the Ceiling Act.” 14.5.  Further, CBDT itself has issued circular in Circular No.3/2018 which is issued, as a measure for reducing litigation, by revision of monetary limits for filing appeals by the Department before the Income­ tax Appellate Tribunal, High Courts and SLP/appeals before this Court. In the said circular it is clearly mentioned that for considering

M/S. ANANDA SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, we find that there is no reason to

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

b) of sub- section (1) or has obtained registration at any time under section 12A [as it stood before its amendment by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 (33 of 1996)] and subsequently it is noticed that the activities of the trust or the institution are being carried out in a manner that the provisions of sections 11 and 12

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

12 Additional Commissioner of Income Tax v Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers’ Association, (1980) 2 SCC 31. 18 prescribed authority to ascertain whether the balance of income is applied wholly and exclusively to the objects for which the applicant is established”.13 28. The revenue also urged that the decision in American Hotel (supra) was wrong in holding that

M/S APEX LABORATORIES P. LTD. vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT II

The appeal is dismissed without order on costs

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

b) Travel facilities: A medical practitioner shall not accept any travel Facility inside the country or outside, including rail, road, air, ship, cruise tickets, paid vacation, etc. from any pharmaceutical or allied healthcare industry or their representatives for self and family members for vacation or for attending conferences, seminars, workshops, CME Programme, etc. as a delegate.] (c) Hospitality: A medical

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

charitable and religious purposes its income was exempt from tax under Section 11(1) of the Act. Various other contentions were raised but all these were rejected by the Income- tax Officer who assessed the income in the hands of the executors and trustees as executors. Against order of the Income-Tax Officer appeal was filed before the Appellate Assistant

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

1)(a), registration under Section 12A is a condition precedent. Section http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3 11 provides for 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

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

b) it should not be for purposes of profit and (c) the aggregate annual receipts of such institution should not exceed the amount or annual receipts as may be prescribed. Such prescription is to be found in Rule 2CA being an amount of Rs.1 crore. 6. The said Section was inserted by Finance Act No.2 of 1998 with effect from

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

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

trust or legal obli- gation, (b) the property should be so held for charitable or religious purposes which enure for the benefit of the pub- lic. [317 E-G] 1.03. The property was given to the Satguru for the common purpose of furthering the objects of the Sat Guru. The property was therefore subject to a legal liability of being

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

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

Appeals are allowed

B. Krishna Prasad, Advs. for the appellant S.P. Gupta, Sr.Adv., Sunil Gupta, H.K. Puri, Advs. with him for the Respondent J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court was delivered: KIRPAL. J. The question involved in these appeals is whether the respondent is a local authority and, therefore, its income is exempt from

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), KANPUR vs. CANARA BANK

The appeals are dismissed

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

b) any financial corporation established by   or   under   a   Central,   State   or Provincial Act, or (c)   the   Life   Insurance   Corporation   of India established under the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956), or (d)  the  Unit   Trust   of   India  established under the Unit Trust of India Act, 1963 (52 of 1963), or (e)   any   company   or   co­operative   society carrying

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

charitable purposes, namely, medical relief, education, any other causes of public utility etc. It is stated that the respondent-trust is running an Engineering College. 4. A survey was conducted under Section 133A of the Act, in the premises of School of Human Genetics and Population Health (SHGPH), Kolkata by the Investigation Wing on 27.01.2014. It appears, during the said

M/S. D.J. MALPANI vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NASHIK

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

trust during the period of the show cause notices. 10. The only question that arises for decision is whether the amount included as Dharmada by a manufacturer and credited for charitable purposes is liable to be included in the assessable value of manufactured goods; the seller having merely acted as conduit between the purchaser and charity. 11. It is necessary

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

1 of 2 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 4305-4306 of 2002 PETITIONER: Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat RESPONDENT: Surat City Gymkhana DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/03/2008 BENCH: ASHOK BHAN & DALVEER BHANDARI JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT O R D E R CIVIL APPEAL NOS.4305-4306 OF 2002 The respondent-assessee claimed exemption under Section 10(23) of the Income