Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.26 seconds)
Vipan Langer, Educational Trust,, ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 1 January, 2016 cites

C.I.T.,Bhopal vs R.K.D.F.Education Society on 8 October, 2014

"8.8 We have not been able to persuade ourselves to accept the view expressed by the Division Bench of the Uttrakhand High Court in the case of Queens Educational Society (supra). There are variety of reasons to support our opinion. Firstly, the scope of the third proviso was not under consideration, inasmuch as, the case before the Uttrakhand High Court pertained to Section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. The third proviso to Section 10(23C)(vi) is not applicable to the cases falling within the purview of Section 10(23C)(iiiad). Secondly, the judgment rendered by the Uttarkhand High Court runs contrary to the provisions of Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act including the provisos thereunder. Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act is equivalent to the provisions of Section 10(22) existing earlier, which were introduced with effect from 1st April, 1999 and it ignores the speech of the Finance Minister made before the introduction of the said provisions, namely.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Geetha Bhavan Trust on 4 November, 1994

In "CIT vs. Geetha Bhavan Trust", 213 ITR 296 (Ker.) it has been held, dealing with section 10(22) of the Act, which provision preceded section 10(23C)(iiiad) on the statute and which, for our present purposes, is in pari materia with section 10(23C)(iiiad), that what is 7 ITA No.503(Asr)/2014 Assessment year : 2010-11 relevant is the source of the income derived from an educational institution existing solely for educational purposes.
Kerala High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Additional Commissioner Of Income-Tax ... vs Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers ... on 19 November, 1979

130. Also in Tolani Education Society v. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Exemption) & Ors., (2013) 351 ITR 184, the Bombay High Court has expressed a view in line with the Punjab and Haryana High Court view, following the judgments of this Court in the Surat Art Silk Manufacturers Association Case and Aditanar Educational Institution case as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 45 - Cited by 2322 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Tma Pai Foundation vs State Of Karnataka on 4 November, 1993

6.1. It was further observed that in the case of 'TMA Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka', (2002) 8 SCC 481, the Constitution Bench comprising of 11 Judges of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has held that private educational institutions are bound to generate funds for the betterment and growth of the institutions and for which there may be surpluses for furtherance of education., that therefore, it is not only permissible, but also an important requirement, to run the institutions of such a strength.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 214 - S R Pandian - Full Document

Aditanar Educational Institution vs Additional Commissioner Ofincome-Tax on 5 February, 1997

130. Also in Tolani Education Society v. Deputy Director of Income Tax (Exemption) & Ors., (2013) 351 ITR 184, the Bombay High Court has expressed a view in line with the Punjab and Haryana High Court view, following the judgments of this Court in the Surat Art Silk Manufacturers Association Case and Aditanar Educational Institution case as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 101 - Full Document

Municipal Corporation Of Delhi Etc vs Children Book Trust Etc on 21 April, 1992

Thirdly, the Uttrakhand High Court has not appreciated correctly the ratio of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Aditanar Educational Institution(supra) and while applying the said judgment including the judgment which had been rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Children Book Trust (supra), it lost sight of the amendment which had been carried out with effect from 1st April, 1999 leading to the introduction of the provisions of Section 10(23C) of the Act. Lastly, that view is not consistent with the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute (surpa)."
Supreme Court of India Cites 28 - Cited by 106 - Full Document
1   2 Next