Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.24 seconds)
M/S.Chirec Education Society, ... vs Assistant Director Of Income Tax (E), ... on 28 February, 2013
cites
Section 11 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 11 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 12 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 25 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax Amritsar vs Tattan Trust Amritsar Etc on 8 July, 1997
In Rattan Trust (6 Supra) cited by the Revenue, the Supreme Court considered
the effect of amendments to Section 13 of the Act and Section 21 A of the Wealth
Tax Act,1957 by the Finance Act,1970 w.e.f.1.4.1971. The provisos thereto laid
down that exemption under Section 11 will not be denied if part of income or
property of the trust or institution created before 1.4.1962, is applied for
benefit of a person referred to in sub-section (3) of section 13 of the Act, if
such use or application is in compliance with mandatory terms of the trust. In
that case, there was no such provision in the trust deed dt.28.3.1942 of the
assessee but was sought to be introduced by way of amendment to the trust deed
dt.14.3.1971 i.e after 1.4.1962 invoking a clause in the trust deed authorizing
making of amendments to the trust deed. The Court said that such a mandate in
the trust deed should have existed before 1.4.1962 and could not have been
brought in by amending the trust deed at a later stage after that crucial date,
even if the trust deed so authorized the trustees to amend the trust deed to
bring in the mandatory condition or requirement for them to invest funds of the
trust in a concern in which they might be interested. It held that any other
interpretation would set at naught the proviso and would defeat the very purpose
for which the proviso was added in Section 13. This case is of no assistance to
Revenue. Merely because the assessee was registered by SSSPL to run the school
after SSSPL's application for approval was rejected by CBSE, it cannot be said
that assessee's payment by way of royalty to SSSPL is prohibited and
consequently the assessee deprived of exemption u/Section 11 .
Pt. Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust vs Director Of Income Tax (Exemption) on 14 May, 2007
34. Muthoottu Charitable Trust (7 supra), Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust (8
Supra) and AWARE (9 Supra) cited by the Revenue were decided on the facts noted
therein that activities of the respective assessee trusts' were carried on in
violation of provisions of Section 13. We are unable to discern any principle of
general application which could be of assistance to Revenue in the present case.
Action For Welfare Awakening In Rural ... vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 28 March, 2003
34. Muthoottu Charitable Trust (7 supra), Kanahya Lal Punj Charitable Trust (8
Supra) and AWARE (9 Supra) cited by the Revenue were decided on the facts noted
therein that activities of the respective assessee trusts' were carried on in
violation of provisions of Section 13. We are unable to discern any principle of
general application which could be of assistance to Revenue in the present case.