PRAKASH NATH KHANNA vs. COMMNR OF INCOME TAX

3) of Section 74A, he may furnish within the time allowed under sub-section (1) or by the thirty first day of July of the assessment year relevant to the previous year during which the loss was sustained, a return of loss in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner and containing such other particulars

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

The appeals are dismissed

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

4. Notices were issued by the appellant to Canara Bank asking for information pertaining to interest paid to the Authority on its deposits. Notices were also issued by the appellant to the Bank for showing cause for not deducting tax at source. A writ petition had been filed by the NOIDA being Writ Petition No.1338/2005 challenging the notices issued

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

3 of 12 Immovable properties mentioned in the will were transferred in October, 1963 and February, 1964. By February, 1964 all the payments as devised by the will were made to respective legatees. On June 19, 1963 an application was filed by the executors and trustees under Section 18 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 for registration

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

trust. Additionally, the appellants were denied registration on the ground that they were not registered under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (hereinafter, “A.P. Charities Act”) as condition precedent for grant of approval. 3. The parties had urged that such a precondition was absent in the provisos to Section

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

3), where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (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

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX vs. GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD

Appeal stand dismissed with no order as to costs

Charitable Institution under Section 11 of the 1961 Act. We may clarify that in this case we are concerned with registration and not with application of income. Before analyzing various provisions of the 1961 Act, we are required to analyse the provisions of Gujarat Maritime Board Act, 1981 ("1981 Act" for short). As can be seen from the preamble

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

Appeals are allowed

4 of the U.P. Forest Corporation Act, the Corporation is consisted of a Chairman and eight members. The chairman as well as the members are nominated by the State Government. Five members, so appointed, must be officers serving under the State Government and three non- officials members appointed by the State Government must be belonging to the category

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

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

4 of 67 offices in Karol Bagh, New Delhi and therefore, were companies’ resident in India in terms of Section 6(3) of the Act. 2.4 A search was conducted on 15th March, 1990 at the premises of M/s Rattan Gupta & Co., Chartered Accountant at Daryaganj, New Delhi and during the course of the search, books of account, cheque books

GANGABAI CHARITIES vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

4 of 6 has to satisfy 630 the following conditions in order to claim benefit of Section 11(1)(a) of the Act:- (1) The income is derived from property held under the trust. (2) The trust is wholly for charitable or religious purposes. (3

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

4(3)(1) of the Act. When an application under Section 35 of the Act was made for ratification, whether the offerings received by the assessee consisted of interest income, property income, and income derived from sale of books and photographs etc. to be excluded, the Commissioner directed deletion thereof. For the year 1939-40, though the Income-tax Officer

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

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

3 (1979) 1 SCC 496 Page 4 of 18 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

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 character of the purpose would not be lost. 9. Coming closer to the section at hand, in Aditanar Educational Institution v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, (1997) 224 ITR 310, this Court while construing the predecessor Section, namely, Section 10(22) of the Income Tax act, held: “The High Court has made an observation that any income which

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

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

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: 2019.02.01 16:27:44 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified C.A.@ SLP(C)No.17428/18 approved under Section 80G(5)(vi) of the Act vide proceedings dated

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

4) SCC 526 2 (1992) 2 SCC 156 10 C.A.@S.L.P.(C)No.12859 of 2020 etc. 11. Sri Venkataraman, learned ASG appearing for the revenue, by drawing our attention to the provisions under Articles 285 and 289 of the   Constitution   of   India,   has   explained   the   intent   behind   the amendment to Section 40 of the Income­tax

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

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

4. Since the Corporation was also assessed for the Assessment Year 1984-85 as was assessed for the Assessment year 1977-78, the Corporation preferred Writ Petition No. 4424 of 1987 before the High Court of Allahabad which was accepted and the High Court, by its order dated 19th May 1988, declared that the Corporation was a ‘local authority

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