ASST. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, MADRAS vs. THANTHI TRUST

trust or other legal obligation. Those charitable objects fall within the first 2 categories referred to in Section 2(15

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX vs. GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD

Appeal stand dismissed with no order as to costs

2. (15) "charitable purpose" includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief, and the advancement of any other object of general public utility. 11. (1) Subject to the provisions of Sections 60 to 63, the following income shall not be included in the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt of the income- (a) income derived

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

trusts or societies with general public utility objectives. The court then recorded its findings, regarding the true interpretation of “charitable objects” under Section 2 (15

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

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

charitable nature. This constituted 1/3 of the property of the testator after funeral expenses, expenses for obtaining probate and paying debts of the testator, if any. One of the questions raised was whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case 1/3 of the property mentioned in the will could be said to be held under trust

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

charitable purpose” in Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act held: “17. The next question that arises is as to what is the meaning of the expression “activity for profit”. Every trust

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

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

Appeals are allowed

15) of the Act and, therefore, it’s income exempt under Section 11(1)(a) of the Act reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Hyderabad, 1986(1) SCR 570. We will first consider the question as to whether the respondent is entitled

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

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

15 C.A.@S.L.P.(C)No.12859 of 2020 etc. in   the   case   of  Jalkal   Vibhag   Nagar   Nigam   &   Ors.  v  Pradeshiya Industrial and Investment Corporation and Another3.  11.3. With   regard   to   turnover   tax,   it   is   submitted   that   unlike surcharge which is an exclusive levy on KSBC, it is fairly submitted that such tax was imposed not only on KSBC under Section

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

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

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

Section 2 (15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in relation to charitable trusts which engage in activities that further

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

The appeals are dismissed

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

2)[***] (3)   The   provisions   of   sub­section   (1)   shall not apply ­ (i).... 5[***] (iii) to such income credited or paid to­ (a)   any   banking   company   to   which   the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949), applies,   or   any   co­operative   society engaged   in   carrying   on   the   business   of banking   (including   a   co­operative   land mortgage bank), or (b) any financial corporation established

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

15 supply cane to sugar factories implies an incidental power to ensure payment of price. In short, conferment of a power implies authority to do everything which could be fairly and reasonably regarded as incidental or consequential to the power conferred. *** Herbert Broom states in the preface to his celebrated work on Legal Maxims --"In the Legal Science, perhaps more

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

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

2 of 3 case of Valjibhai Muljibhai Soneji v. State of Bombay, (now Gujarat) [1964] 3 SCR 686 wherein it was held that the definitions given in the General Clauses Act, govern all Central Acts and Regulations made after the commencement of this Act. Following the said decision, this Court held that even though Section

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

Section 10(23) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Years 1991-92 and 1992-93. The said 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