Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 120 (1.57 seconds)
Documents citing The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... vs Thanthi Trust Etc. Etc on 31 January, 2001

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.P.Iya Nadar Charitable Trust on 18 September, 2012

34. As far as the relevance of the decision reported in [2001] 247 ITR 785 (Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Thanthi Trust) to the present case is concerned, as already noted, the reported decision has to be seen in the light of the findings arrived at on the terms of the Trust deed. As far as the present case is concerned, with the finding given by the Tribunal that the primary purpose of the Trust was to afford relief of poor, education and medical relief, the means employed by exploiting its assets to earn income to achieve the objects, cannot, in any manner, be applied to defeat the claim of the assessee under Section 11.
Madras High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 3 - C Venkataraman - Full Document

(Virtual Hearing Dates : 10.07.202 vs The Director Of Income Tax (Exemptions) on 29 October, 2020

The appeal filed by the Revenue against the decision in 137 ITR 735 (Madras), in the case of CIT vs. Thanthi Trust [(1999) 239 ITR 0502] was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein, it was held that the Aditanar College was run, not by the assessee Trust, but by another registered charitable society and in such circumstances, the High Court was right in its conclusion which it had arrived at holding that no part of the Revenue's case, at any point of time that the credit entries made in the assessee's books of account were not genuine or true or that they were mere make-believe or bogus. Further, it was observed that it was also not brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the ITO doubted the said entries and called upon the assessee to produce the accounts of the College and that the assessee failed 67/122 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.822 of 2018 to produce the same. With these observations, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. Thus, in the light of the above decisions in the assessee's own case, it will be too late in the day for the Revenue to now contend that the activities of the assessee are not charitable purposes. The attempt of the Revenue is to rake up a settled issue with an attempt to reopen the entire matter under the guise of introduction of the provision of Section 2(15), which defines 'charitable purpose'. Such attempt is wholly unsustainable and impermissible under law. The Revenue is estopped both on law as well as on facts from raising any contention as mentioned by the DIT(E) in its order dated 08.12.2011. The said order is an outcome of wrong understanding of the legal provisions, the effect of the judgment in C.S.No.90 of 1961 and the series of litigations between the Department and the assessee Trust all of which were in favour of the assessee. Thus, on the facts of the case, the principle of estoppel will hit the Revenue and they are not entitled to state that the assessee Trust is not carrying on a charitable activity and thus, it is not in the field of education, etc.
Madras High Court Cites 95 - Cited by 0 - T S Sivagnanam - Full Document

Director Of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs M/S. Samyuktha Gowda Saraswatha Sabha on 28 June, 2011

In the light of the said claim, this Court, following the decision reported in 247 ITR 785  ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. THANTHI TRUST, considered the claim and held that so long as the income held in trust was utilised towards the attainment of the objectives, it was irrelevant if the business was run on commercial expediency with a profit motive. Thus holding that the business income was used towards the achievement of the object of the trust and hence incidental to the achievement of the object of the trust, it thought it fit to remit the matter to find out the extent to which the income was applied to the achievement of the object of the Trust that the claim of the assessee under Section 11(4A) of the Income Tax Act for exemption could be considered. Thus a reading of the judgment does not, in any manner, say anything in conflict with the earlier decision. Thus in understanding the relevancy of the said decision, one cannot lose sight of the facts prevalent in the said decision and in the present decision.
Madras High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - C Venkataraman - Full Document

M/S Chandigarh Lawn Tennis ... vs Ito (Exemptions), Chandigarh on 26 July, 2018

69(5). We may point out here that the provisions of sections 11(4) and 11 (4A) of the Act are general provisions and are applicable to all the institutions claiming exemption u/s 11 of the Act carrying out activity for charitable purposes. Definition of the ITA No. 1382/Chd/2016- Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Association, Chandigarh 85 'Charitable purposes' as provided u/s 2(15) of the Income Tax Act includes relief to the poor, education yoga, medical relief, preservation of environment (including watersheds, forests and wildlife) and preservation of monuments or places or objects of artistic or historic interest, and the advancement of any other object of general public utility. Sub section 4A do not bar the carrying on of business activity , however, puts restriction that such business should be incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or institution and separate books of account are maintained. The restriction put by earlier section 13(1)(bb) and after its omission and by the subsequently inserted section 11(4A) have been well considered, interpreted and applied by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Thanthi Trust" (supra) and thus it can not be said to be said there is any anomaly created by the above provisions . 69(6). Then there is sub section (8) to section 13 of the Income Tax Act which states that nothing contained in sections 11 or 12 shall operate so as to exclude any income from total income of the previous years if the provisions of first proviso to clause (15) of section 2 becomes applicable. So the construction that any type of receipt which is incidental or ancillary to the carrying out of the advancement of objects of general public utility will be considered as income from charitable purposes if applied, such construction would not only render the first and second proviso to section 2(15) as amended from time to time and but also section 13(8) of the ITA No. 1382/Chd/2016- Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Association, Chandigarh 86 statute redundant and inoperative defeating the purpose for which they were brought into statute by Parliament will be defeated. At the same time, when we read the provisions of section 13(8) in isolation, it will make the provisions of sections 11 (4) and 11 (4A) of the Act inoperative for the institution carrying of object of advancement of general public utility, which also involves the activity of carrying of business, trade or commerce generating ancillary or incidental income. However, by the insertion of second proviso to section 2(15) as amended from time to time, the anomaly, if any, has been removed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 63 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Deputy Director Of Income Tax ... vs Willingdon Charitable Trust on 30 June, 2006

The Hon'ble apex Court in Asstt. CIT v. Thanthi Trust (supra) has dealt with the issue regarding the applicability and scope of Sub-section (4A) of Section 11 as amended w.e.f. 1st April, 1992 and the Hon'ble apex Court has held that provision is more beneficial to the trust or institution than was the scope of the section before the amendment w.e.f. 1st April, 1992. After the amendment of this section, it requires for the business income of a trust or institution to be exempt is that the business should be incidental to the attainment of objectives of the trust or institution. The income from the business which is utilized by the trust or institution for the purposes of achieving the objectives of the trust or the institution is, surely a business which is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the trust or institution. This view has clearly been expressed by the Hon'ble apex Court as narrated above. In the present case in hand, the only issue is as to whether the income from these two auditoriums and ladies hostel including the rent, amenities and donations is for the purpose of achieving the objects of the trust or incidental to the objects of the trust. We are of the considered view that these incomes are for the attainment of the objects of the trust and these incomes are arising out of the properties held in trust. These properties are held as trust property and in no way this can be termed as profits and gains of the business which are not for the attainment of objects of the trust. In view of these facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that w.e.f. 1st April, 1992, even after amendment in Section 11(4A) of the Act, the assessee is entitled to exemption from excess income over expenditure from these two auditoriums and ladies hostel on account of rent, donations and amenities.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai Cites 23 - Cited by 13 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Janakiammal Ayyandar Trust on 9 November, 2004

4. On facts, the Tribunal found that the income of the assessee had been employed to achieve its charitable objects and therefore, even in the light of Section 11(4A) of the Act and applying the decision in ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. THANTHI TRUST, [2001] 247 ITR 785, the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 11 of the Act.
Madras High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 6 - P D Premkumar - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next