Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

Justice V.V.S.Rao) INTRODUCTION Whether an Agriculture Market Committee constituted by the Government of Andhra Pradesh under Section 4(1) of the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 (the AMC Act, for brevity), is an institution for charitable purpose? This is a core question of law that is raised in this batch of appeals filed under Section 260A

PRL COMMR OF INCOME TAX, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DIST vs. V DWARAKANATH REDDY, CHITTOOR

The appeals are hereby dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present : Mr. Denesh Goyal, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue Mr. K.L. Goyal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Umang Goyal, Advocate for the respondent (in ITA No.161 of 2016) Mr. Rohit Sud, Advocate for the respondent (in ITA Nos.7, 42 & 99 of 2015 and ITA No. 26 of 2016) * * * AVNEESH JHINGAN, J. This order shall dispose of five appeals

The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. Moschip Semiconductor Technology Ltd.,

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order 11/09/2017 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the assessee. 2. This Court while admitting the matter framed the following substantial question of law:- “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the ITAT was justified

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS) vs. M/S JAYADARSHINI HOUSING PVT LTD

The appeal is allowed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI O R D E R % 23.05.2018 The learned counsel for the respondent submits upon instructions that although the Trust has been dissolved with the consent of respondent no.2, an indemnity cannot be granted to the erstwhile members of the Trust for the reason that R-2 considers the act of the appellant as illegal; these actions exposed

The Commissioner of Income Tax I vs. M/s. Biological E. Ltd.,

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Ms. Pridhi J. Sandhu, Advocate for appellant. Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with Ms. Pranika Singla, Advocate for respondent. *** PARMOD GOYAL, J. Present appeal has been filed against the order dated 29.09.2010 (Annexure A-3) passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, whereby appeal against order dated 16.03.2010 (Annexure A-2) passed by Commissioner of Income

Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. M/s.R.A.K.Ceramics India Private Limited

Appeals are allowed; and

Bench: SANJAY KUMAR,M.S.K.JAISWAL

JUSTICE UMESH M. ADIGA ITA No.595 OF 2016 C/W ITA No.596 OF 2016 C/W ITA No.597 OF 2016 IN ITA No.595 OF 2016 BETWEEN M/S. KAMMAVARI SANGHAM REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI. Y. RAMACHANDRA NAIDU, NO. 145/4, MOUNT JOY EXTENSION, HANUMANTHANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 019. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR M. LAVA, ADVOCATE) AND THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME

The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/s.Mold-Tek Technologies Ltd

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA   Date : 17/02/2020   ORAL JUDGMENT   (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1. This Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is at the instance of the Revenue and is directed against Page 1 of 24 C/TAXAP/273/2011                                                                                                 JUDGMENT the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'A' Bench, Ahmedabad, dated 5th August

Commissioner of Income Tax-1, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

Bench: This Court Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter To Be Referred As “The Act”) Against The Order Dated 16.07.2010 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench-A, Chandigarh (Hereinafter To Be Referred As “The Itat”) In Ita No. 510/Chd/2010 - M/S Young Scholars Educational Society, Barnala Vs Cit, Patiala, Whereby The Order Dated 26.03.2010 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patiala (Hereinafter To Be Referred As “The Commissioner”) Was Quashed & The Varinder Singh 2024.05.13 10:09 I Attest To The Accuracy & Authencity Of This Order/Judgment

JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Amanpreet Singh (A.P.), Senior Standing Counsel, for the appellant. Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sidhant Suri, Advocate, for the respondent in ITA No. 21 of 2011. Mr. Pankaj Jain, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Divya Suri, and Mr. Sachin Bhardwaj, Advocates, for the respondent in ITA No. 94 of 2011. SANJEEV PRAKASH

AP State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited vs. The Income Tax Officer

In the result, the Appeals are partly allowed

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

Justice AIok Aradhe) Mr. A.V.Krishna Kaundinya, learned Senior Counsel appears for the appellants. Mr. J.V Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel appears for the Revenue. 2. These appeals have been filed by the Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'). The subject matter of appeals pertains to the assessment years

Samaj Seva Nidhi, vs. ACIT [Inv] circle-II

Bench: A RAMALINGESWARA RAO,DILIP B. BHOSALE

Justice A.Ramalingeswara Rao) This appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act), against the order in I.T.A.No.133/V/1997 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, on 05.03.2003. In this appeal filed by the assessee, the substantial question of law that arises for our consideration is as follows: “Whether, on the facts

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Sri.G.Sanjay Chowdary

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

JUSTICE. THIS ITA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T This appeal is filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for the sake of brevity) by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli, (hereinafter referred

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II vs. M/S.TRANSPORT CORPORATION OF INDIA

In the result, we set aside the assessment orders, except to

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/28TH BHADRA, 1936 ITA.No. 133 of 2014 () ----------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 40/COCH/2013 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 31-01-2014 APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/ASSESSEE: -------------------------------------------------------- M/S. PODIKUNJU MUSALIAR MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL& CHARITABLE TRUST CHANDANATHOPE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/REVENUE: ------------------------------------------------------ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SRI P.K.R.MENON(SR.) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH

M/S NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CONSTRUCTION vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Justice P.Sam Koshg) We have heard Sri S.Ravi, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms.K.Mamata, learned standing counsel for the respondent. 1. Since all these appeals are of the same assessee and the grounds of appeal being also same, the question of law decided also being the same, all these connected matters are taken up and decided by this common

The Commissioner of Income Tax III, Hyderabad vs. M/s. Goldstar Holdings AND Industries Limited, Hyderabad.

The appeal is dismissed, but in the circumstances,

JUSTICE R. K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 23.03.2022 Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ. 13. 1. The present appeal by the Revenue is directed against an order dated 1st December, 2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (ITAT) dismissing the Revenue’s IT(SS)A No.31/CTK/2001 for the Block Assessment Year (BAY) 1st April 1998 to 25th February

The Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. Sri Ashven Datla

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

charitable trust registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860. Shri Raghuveer Lal Ghai is Manager/Trustee/Power of Attorney Holder of the said Trust. The predecessor of the defendants Late Tara Chand was inducted as tenant at Bhawan No.9, Advertand Marg, Rishikesh on property nos. 131 to 133 on 01.07.1956 on rent at the rate of Rs. 10 per month, as also

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI METTAM PENCHALA NAIDU

Bench: This Court That The 1St Assessment Order Of The Ito Was Passed On 28.03.1988, Which Was Challenged Before The Leaned Cit (A) & The Same Was Dismissed On 28.11.1988. Against The Said Order, The Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Itat, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack, Which Was Dismissed On 19.01.1990. Thereafter, By Order Dated 13.12.1990 Passed In A Misc. Application, The Order Dated 19.01.1990 Was Recalled & The Matter Was Heard Afresh. Again On 10.05.1991, Learned Tribunal Decided The Matter & Allowed The Exemption To The Assessee. The Revenue Filed Writ Petition Before This Court Challenging The Rectification Order Dated 13.12.1990. This Court On 02.12.1991 Allowed The Writ Petition & Quashed The Recalling Order Dated 13.12.1990 As Well As Its Substantive Order Dated

charitable trust registered as such by the CIT, Orissa, under s.12A of the Act. For the assessment year 1985-86, it filed return disclosing loss of Rs. 15,76,880, before the ITO, Ward A, Circle II, Cuttack. The loss was arrived at after making provision for liabilities incurred, taking into account amounts receivable but not received. The Assessing Officer

The Commissioner of Income Tax III,. vs. Sri Sudhir Sanghi

Bench: This Court That The 1St Assessment Order Of The Ito Was Passed On 28.03.1988, Which Was Challenged Before The Leaned Cit (A) & The Same Was Dismissed On 28.11.1988. Against The Said Order, The Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Itat, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack, Which Was Dismissed On 19.01.1990. Thereafter, By Order Dated 13.12.1990 Passed In A Misc. Application, The Order Dated 19.01.1990 Was Recalled & The Matter Was Heard Afresh. Again On 10.05.1991, Learned Tribunal Decided The Matter & Allowed The Exemption To The Assessee. The Revenue Filed Writ Petition Before This Court Challenging The Rectification Order Dated 13.12.1990. This Court On 02.12.1991 Allowed The Writ Petition & Quashed The Recalling Order Dated 13.12.1990 As Well As Its Substantive Order Dated

charitable trust registered as such by the CIT, Orissa, under s.12A of the Act. For the assessment year 1985-86, it filed return disclosing loss of Rs. 15,76,880, before the ITO, Ward A, Circle II, Cuttack. The loss was arrived at after making provision for liabilities incurred, taking into account amounts receivable but not received. The Assessing Officer

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

Charitable societies and trusts are not part of the estate of the testatrix which are managed by the respective managing committees and trustees of the societies or trusts. The companies are separate legal entities controlled by their Board of Directors and the affairs of the estate of the testatrix do not include the right to control the affairs