Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Trust's Charitable Activities Upheld, Exemptions Allowed, Set-off Permitted, Depreciation Valid</h1> <h3>Deputy Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad Versus Adarsh Foundation, C/o Sal Hospital & Medical Institution</h3> Deputy Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad Versus Adarsh Foundation, C/o Sal Hospital & Medical Institution - TMI Issues Involved:1. Exemption under Section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act.2. Violation of conditions under Section 13 of the Income Tax Act.3. Validity of incomplete Form 10B as a ground for disallowance.4. Set-off of brought forward losses against current year’s surplus.5. Disallowance of depreciation on assets.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Exemption under Section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act:The Revenue contended that the assessee trust violated the principles of charity by entering into an agreement with SCPL, transferring assets and liabilities, and receiving management fees without adequate rationale. The AO argued that the trust's actions were against the principles of charity and disallowed the exemption under Section 11(1)(a). However, the CIT(A) found that the agreement was made to manage the trust's financial crisis and ensure professional handling of the hospital. The CIT(A) concluded that the trust's activities were in line with its charitable objectives, and the exemption under Section 11(1)(a) was rightly allowed.2. Violation of conditions under Section 13 of the Income Tax Act:The AO claimed that the trust violated Section 13 by transferring assets to SCPL, which involved persons specified under Section 13(3). The CIT(A) disagreed, stating that the trust received fair compensation and did not provide undue benefits to specified persons. The CIT(A) emphasized that the trust's income was not applied for the benefit of specified persons, and the agreement with SCPL was on commercial terms, ensuring the trust's financial stability.3. Validity of incomplete Form 10B as a ground for disallowance:The AO disallowed the exemption under Section 11, citing incomplete disclosures in Form 10B. The CIT(A) ruled that the incomplete Form 10B was not a valid ground for disallowance, as the trust had no reason to believe that any transfer of funds was made to specified persons under Section 13. The CIT(A) concluded that the AO's ground for disallowance based on Form 10B was not tenable.4. Set-off of brought forward losses against current year’s surplus:The AO disallowed the set-off of brought forward losses against the current year's surplus, arguing that the trust's income was computed under Section 12A(a) and Section 11. The CIT(A) allowed the set-off, citing judicial rulings from the Gujarat, Bombay, and Rajasthan High Courts, which permitted the set-off of previous years' deficits against the current year's surplus. The CIT(A) held that the AO's interpretation of Section 11 was incorrect and allowed the set-off of brought forward losses.5. Disallowance of depreciation on assets:The AO disallowed the claim of depreciation, arguing that allowing depreciation on assets, the cost of which was already allowed as a deduction, would result in double deduction. The CIT(A) allowed the claim, relying on judicial precedents from various High Courts, which held that depreciation should be allowed while computing the income of a trust. The CIT(A) concluded that the AO's disallowance of depreciation was not justified.Conclusion:The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s findings on all issues, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal agreed that the trust's actions were in line with its charitable objectives, the set-off of brought forward losses was permissible, and the claim of depreciation was justified. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order and concluded that the trust was entitled to the exemptions and deductions claimed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found