[2015] 55 taxmann.com 255 (SC)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Queen’s Educational Society v. Commissioner of Income-tax
*In favour of assessee
[2015] 61 taxmann.com 262 (Delhi)
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Hamdard Laboratories India v.
Assistant Director of Income-tax (Exemption)*
*In favour of assessee
[2016] 67 taxmann.com 230 (Kerala)
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust v.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Kozhikode*
*In favour of assessee
[2015] 53 taxmann.com 311 (Punjab & Haryana)
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
Shishu Niketan Panchkula Educational Society v.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula*
*In favour of assessee
[2015] 60 taxmann.com 126 (Kerala)
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Dawn Educational Charitable Trust v.Commissioner of Income-tax*
*In favour of revenue
[2015] 58 taxmann.com 288 (Bombay)
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Director of Income-tax (Exemptions), Mumbai v. Shri Vile Parle Kelavani Mandal*
*In favour of assessee. SLP of dept admitted by SC
[2016] 66 taxmann.com 362 (Kerala)
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Travancore Education Society v. Commissioner of Income-tax*
*In favour of revenue
[2015] 58 taxmann.com 218 (Bombay)
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Director of Income-tax (Exemptions), Mumbai v. Jasubhai Foundation*
*In favour of assessee – See amendment in Finance Act 2014
[2015] 54 taxmann.com 247 (Bombay)
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Commissioner of Income-tax v.
Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust*
*In favour of assessee
[2015] 58 taxmann.com 184 (Karnataka)
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Director of Income-tax, Exemptions, Bangalore v. Envisions *
*In favour of assessee
[2016] 67 taxmann.com 187 (Allahabad)
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Commissioner of Income-tax v.
Sisters of Our Lady of Providence Education Society*
*In favour of assessee
(2015] 55 taxmann.com 34 (Karnataka)
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Director of Income-tax (Exemption), Bangalore v.
Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board*
*In favour of assessee
[2016] 70 taxmann.com 181 (Bombay)
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Director of Income-tax (Exemptions) v. Khar Gymkhana
*in favour of the assessee
In view of CBDT’s Circular No.21/2016 dated 27-5-2016, Registration of a trust cant be cancelled merely because receipts from commercial activities exceed Rs.25Lakhs unless there is change in the nature of its activities or its activities are not genuine
[2015] 55 taxmann.com 516 (Karnataka)
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Commissioner of Income-tax, Exemptions, Bangalore
v. CMR Jnanadhara Trust
* in favour of the assessee
When there was substantial growth in trust on account of services rendered by trustees, payment made to trustees for such services was not in violation of section 13 and benefit under section 11 was available
[2015] 57 taxmann.com 8 (Allahabad)
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Commissioner of Income-tax v.
Muzafar Nagar Development Authority*
*In favour of revenue
[2016] 67 taxmann.com 264 (SC)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur
v. Society for Promn. of Edn., Allahabad*
*in favour of the assessee
Where assessee-society filed an application under section 12A for grant of registration and same was not responded to within stipulated period of six months, application for registration was to be deemed to have been allowed.
[2015] 56 taxmann.com 393 (Karnataka)
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Maheshwari Foundation v.
Director of Income-tax (Exemptions), Bangalore*
[2015] 61 taxmann.com 68 (P & H)
HIGH COURT OF P & H
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Christian Medical College*
*In favour of assessee
Dy CIT v. Society for Rural Improvement
ITA No. 329/Coch/2014 dated 01.06.2016
ITAT Cochin
* In favour of the assessee
http://www.itatonline.in:8080/itat/upload/-555816118608301964713$5%5E1REFNOSopciety_for_Rural_Development-329-14_&_co36-14.pdf
–Andhra Pradesh HC – CIT vs. Spandana I.T.A. No.304/2013 dated 10/07/2013.
–Cochin ITAT – K.P. Paul Foundation vs. CIT (2014) 40 CCH 314
–Chennai ITAT – Kurinji Welfare Society Vs. ACIT
[2016] 70 taxmann.com 48 (Hyderabad – Trib.)
IN THE ITAT HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A’
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle- 1(1), Hyderabad
v. A.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.
* in favour of the assessee
[2015] 55 taxmann.com 379 (Hyderabad – Trib.)
Assistant Director of Income-tax, (Exemptions)-I, Hyderabad v.
Hyderabad Study Circle*
*In favour of assessee.
[2015] 60 taxmann.com 188 (Patna – Trib.)
International School of Human Resources & Social Welfare Society v. Commissioner of Income-tax-1, Patna
*In favour of assessee.
[2015] 57 taxmann.com 333 (Pune – Trib.)
Income-tax Officer, Ward -3, Ahmednagar
v. Noble Medical Foundation & Research Centre*
*In favour of assessee.
Where assessee-hospital was providing medical relief to people at large, merely because surplus was generated from hospital activities could not be ground to deny exemption under section 11 to assessee
[2015] 56 taxmann.com 118 (Mumbai – Trib.)
Critical Art and Media Practices
v. Director of Income-tax (Exemption), Mumbai*
*In favour of assessee.
[2015] 56 taxmann.com 172 (Cochin – Trib.)
State Forum of Bankers Club (Kerala)
v. Income-tax Officer (Tech), Kochi*
*In favour of revenue.
Where assessee-trust was rendering service to banks by organizing lectures and seminars for benefit of bank employees, same was not charitable activity and assessee was not entitled for recognition under section 2(15).
[2015] 59 taxmann.com 379 (Chennai – Trib.)
Anjuman-E-Himayath-E-Islam
v. Assistant Director of Income-tax (Exemption)-IV, Chennai*
*In favour of revenue
In case of assessee-trust registered under section 12A, carry forward of excess application of funds cannot be allowed as per provisions of Act because it would result in notional application of income in subsequent year.
[2015] 60 taxmann.com 165 (Bang – Trib.)
Deputy Director of Income-tax (E), Circle 17 (1), Bangalore v.
Jyothy Charitable Trust*
*In favour of assessee
In case of charitable trust whose income is exempt under section 11, excess of expenditure incurred on religious and charitable purposes in earlier years can be adjusted against income of subsequent years and such adjustment would be regarded as application of income for subsequent years.
[2015] 59 taxmann.com 467 (Cochin – Trib.)
Dharmodayam Co.
v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-1 (1), Thrissur*
*In favour of assessee
In order to claim deduction under section 11(2) it is not necessary that deposits have to be made out of current year’s income; earmarking of existing fixed deposits, which is free from any lien, towards income accumulated under section 11(2) during year under consideration would be sufficient compliance.
[2014] 52 taxmann.com 139 (Chennai – Trib.)
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions)-II v.
Sri Vekkaliamman Educational & Charitable Trust*
*In favour of revenue
Purchasing of gold by a trust on plea of distribution of gold medals to be given to meritorious students was an investment in gold bullion in violation of section 11(5).
[2015] 58 taxmann.com 323 (Cochin – Trib.)
Christian Women’s Association v. Commissioner of Income-tax*
*In favour of assessee
Also see
[2015] 56 taxmann.com 291 (Mumbai Trib.)
(2015) 35 ITR (Trib) 267
[2015] 58 taxmann.com 205 (Cochin – Trib.)
Progressive Educational & Charitable Trust v.
Commissioner of Income-tax*
*In favour of revenue
2015] 61 taxmann.com 283 (Chandigarh – Trib.)
Paramount Education Charitable Trust
v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula*
*In favour of assessee
Where activities of assessee-trust were found to be charitable in nature, merely because it was not registered under Societies Act, registration under section 12A could not be denied.
[2016] 70 taxmann.com 54 (Delhi – Trib.)
IN THE ITAT DELHI BENCH ‘D’
Deputy Director of Income-tax (E), Trust Circle-IV, New Delhi
v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
FACTS
HELD
Compiled by
CA PRASANTH SRINIVAS
S.S. AYYAR & CO., CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, KOTTAYAM
Phone: 9447125731 E-mail: ssayyarandco@gmail.com