Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.25 seconds)

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

13.In Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Mfr. Association reported in (1980) 121 ITR 1, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while construing the definition of “charitable purpose” in Section 2(15) of the Act, held that every Trust or institution must have a purpose for which it is established and every purpose must for its accomplishment involve the carrying of an activity. The activity must, however, be for profit in order to attract the exclusionary clause and the question therefore, is when can an activity be said to be one for profit? It was held that it is not enough that as a matter of fact, an activity results in profit, but it must be carried on with the object of ___________ Page 11 of 21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.619 of 2011 earning profit. It was further observed that profit-making must be the end to which the activity must be directed or in other words, the predominant object of the activity must be making a profit. Further, where an activity is not pervaded by profit motive, but is carried on primarily for serving the charitable purpose, it would not be correct to describe it as an activity for profit, though it may be carried on in advancement of the charitable purpose of the Trust or institution. It was further pointed out that the predominant object of such activity must be to subserve the charitable purpose and not to earn profit.
Supreme Court of India Cites 45 - Cited by 2322 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Dharmadeepti, Alwaye, Kerala vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kerala on 24 July, 1978

14.By referring to the decision in the case of Dharmadeepti vs. CIT reported in (1978) 3 SCC 499, it was pointed out that the activity must be “essentially charitable in nature” and it must not be a cover for carrying on an activity, which has profit making as its predominant object. Further, it was pointed out that this interpretation of the exclusionary clause in Section 2(15) derives considerable support from the speech made by the Finance Minister while introducing that provision. It was further pointed out that the test to be applied is whether the predominant object of the activity ___________ Page 12 of 21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.619 of 2011 involved in carrying out the object of general public utility is to subserve the charitable purpose or not to earn profit. Where profit making is the predominant object of the activity, the purpose, though an object of general public utility, would cease to be a charitable purpose. But where the predominant object of the activity is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, it would not lose its character of a charitable purpose merely because some profit arises from the activity. Further, it was pointed out that the exclusionary clause does not require that the activity must be carried on in such a manner that it does not result in any profit. Further, it would be difficult for persons in-charge of a Trust or institution to carry on the activity that the expenditure balances the income and there is no resulting profit and that would not only be difficult of practical realisation, but would also reflect unsound principle of management.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 62 - R S Pathak - Full Document

Sole Trustee Loka Shikshana Turst vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mysore on 28 August, 1975

The Hon'ble Supreme Court agreed with the decision in Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust vs. CIT reported in (1975) 101 ITR (SC), that if the profits must necessarily feed a charitable purpose under the terms of the Trust, the mere fact that the activities of the Trust yield profit will not alter the charitable character of the Trust.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 2203 - H R Khanna - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Sales Tax, Mumbai vs M/S Shoe Bazar Queen on 28 April, 2017

10.Further, it is submitted that the decision in Queen's Educational Society (supra) rendered by the High Court of Uttaranchal was tested for its correctness before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the Trust in Queen's Educational Society vs. CIT reported in (2015) 55 taxmann.com 255 (SC) and the said decision was reversed. Further, the said decision could not have been applied to the case of the assessee-Trust, as the case was whether the said Queen's Educational Society had fulfilled the three requirements as stipulated under Section 10(23C) of the Act whereas, in the instant case, the issue is whether the application filed by the assessee-Trust for ___________ Page 9 of 21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.619 of 2011 registration under Section 12AA could have been rejected. Therefore, the appellant erroneously rejected the application without noticing the fact that the claim made by the Queen's Educational Society was a claim for exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Act and such claim made by them was rejected by the Assessing Officer, the said order was reversed by the CIT(A), which order was confirmed by the Tribunal in an appeal filed by the Revenue and challenging the order, appeal was filed before the High Court, which was allowed by setting aside the order of the Tribunal and affirming the order of the Assessing Officer and aggrieved by the same, the said assessee filed appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is submitted that in the said decision, various other decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court were referred to and the law laid down in those decisions will come to the aid and assistance of the assessee-Trust and therefore, the Tribunal rightly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee-Trust and directed registration to be granted under Section 12AA of the Act.

Apeejay Education Society, Ludhiana vs Dcit (Exemptions), Chandigarh on 22 February, 2021

16.The Court took into consideration the decision of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, which has been followed by the Delhi High Court in St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) vs. CIT reported in (2013) 353 ITR 320 and also in Tolani Education Society vs. Dy. DIT (Exemptions) reported in (2013) 35 ITR 184, where the High Court of Bombay held that the petitioner (therein) has a surplus of income over expenditure for the three years cannot by any stretch of logical reasoning, lead to the conclusion that the petitioner therein does not exist solely for educational purposes or that it exists only for profit. Further, it was held that the test to be applied is as to whether the predominant nature of the activity is educational. The fact that an incidental surplus, which is generated and which has resulted in ___________ Page 15 of 21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.619 of 2011 additions to the fixed assets, is utilized towards upgrading the facilities of the educational institution, was held to be permissible. Further, it was observed that without the advancement of technology, no college or institution can offer to remain stagnant. Further, it was held that an educational institution cannot be prohibited from upgrading its infrastructure or facilities save on the pain of losing the benefit of the exemption under Section 10(23C) and imposing such a condition, which is not contained in the statute, would lead to a perversion of the basic purpose for which such exemptions have been granted to educational institutions. It was further pointed out that knowledge in contemporary times is technology driven. Educational institutions have to modernize, upgrade and respond to the changing ethos of education. The said decision of the High Court of Bombay and the other decisions of the High Courts were approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 13 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

St.Lawrence Educational Socieity ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi ... on 4 February, 2011

16.The Court took into consideration the decision of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, which has been followed by the Delhi High Court in St. Lawrence Educational Society (Regd.) vs. CIT reported in (2013) 353 ITR 320 and also in Tolani Education Society vs. Dy. DIT (Exemptions) reported in (2013) 35 ITR 184, where the High Court of Bombay held that the petitioner (therein) has a surplus of income over expenditure for the three years cannot by any stretch of logical reasoning, lead to the conclusion that the petitioner therein does not exist solely for educational purposes or that it exists only for profit. Further, it was held that the test to be applied is as to whether the predominant nature of the activity is educational. The fact that an incidental surplus, which is generated and which has resulted in ___________ Page 15 of 21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.619 of 2011 additions to the fixed assets, is utilized towards upgrading the facilities of the educational institution, was held to be permissible. Further, it was observed that without the advancement of technology, no college or institution can offer to remain stagnant. Further, it was held that an educational institution cannot be prohibited from upgrading its infrastructure or facilities save on the pain of losing the benefit of the exemption under Section 10(23C) and imposing such a condition, which is not contained in the statute, would lead to a perversion of the basic purpose for which such exemptions have been granted to educational institutions. It was further pointed out that knowledge in contemporary times is technology driven. Educational institutions have to modernize, upgrade and respond to the changing ethos of education. The said decision of the High Court of Bombay and the other decisions of the High Courts were approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 26 - S Khanna - Full Document

M/S Queen'S Educational Society vs Commr.Of Income Tax on 16 March, 2015

10.Further, it is submitted that the decision in Queen's Educational Society (supra) rendered by the High Court of Uttaranchal was tested for its correctness before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the Trust in Queen's Educational Society vs. CIT reported in (2015) 55 taxmann.com 255 (SC) and the said decision was reversed. Further, the said decision could not have been applied to the case of the assessee-Trust, as the case was whether the said Queen's Educational Society had fulfilled the three requirements as stipulated under Section 10(23C) of the Act whereas, in the instant case, the issue is whether the application filed by the assessee-Trust for ___________ Page 9 of 21 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ T.C.A.No.619 of 2011 registration under Section 12AA could have been rejected. Therefore, the appellant erroneously rejected the application without noticing the fact that the claim made by the Queen's Educational Society was a claim for exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Act and such claim made by them was rejected by the Assessing Officer, the said order was reversed by the CIT(A), which order was confirmed by the Tribunal in an appeal filed by the Revenue and challenging the order, appeal was filed before the High Court, which was allowed by setting aside the order of the Tribunal and affirming the order of the Assessing Officer and aggrieved by the same, the said assessee filed appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is submitted that in the said decision, various other decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court were referred to and the law laid down in those decisions will come to the aid and assistance of the assessee-Trust and therefore, the Tribunal rightly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee-Trust and directed registration to be granted under Section 12AA of the Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 37 - Cited by 180 - R F Nariman - Full Document
1