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

        Assessee's Unexercised Option Confirmed; Tribunal Dismisses Appeal

        Universal Education Foundation Versus The Assistant Director of Income Tax (Exemption) -II (2), Mumbai-53

        Universal Education Foundation Versus The Assistant Director of Income Tax (Exemption) -II (2), Mumbai-53 - TMI Issues Involved:
        1. Whether the consideration of Rs. 3,55,45,600/- was received by the assessee during the financial year 2010-11.
        2. Whether the assessee exercised the option under Explanation 2 of Section 11(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
        3. Whether there was a mistake apparent from the record in the Tribunal's order dated 26.06.2019.

        Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

        1. Receipt of Consideration:
        The Tribunal examined whether the assessee received the consideration of Rs. 3,55,45,600/- during the financial year 2010-11. The original deed of assignment dated 19.01.2011, signed by the assessee, the confirming party, and the assignee, was registered on the same date with the Sub-Registrar, Thane-II. The deed explicitly stated that the consideration of Rs. 3,55,45,600/- was paid by the assignee to the assessee, evidenced by a cheque dated 18.01.2011. The Tribunal found that the assessee received the amount during the financial year 2010-11, based on the deed of assignment and the cheque details.

        2. Exercise of Option under Explanation 2 of Section 11(1):
        The Tribunal assessed whether the assessee exercised the option under Explanation 2 of Section 11(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the amount was not received during the year ended 31.03.2011 and thus should be deemed applied towards charitable purposes in subsequent years. The Tribunal noted that the assessee's submission to the AO, dated 20.03.2014, indicated there was no definite possibility of receipt, and the consideration was not taxed in AY 2011-12. However, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee did not exercise the option under Explanation 2 of Section 11(1), as required by the statute.

        3. Mistake Apparent from Record:
        The Tribunal evaluated whether there was a mistake apparent from the record in its order dated 26.06.2019. The assessee argued that the Tribunal overlooked crucial facts and submissions, particularly paragraph 8 of the assessee's submission, which should be considered as exercising the option under Explanation 2 of Section 11(1). The Tribunal referred to the decision in Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 227 (SC) and other relevant case laws to determine what constitutes a mistake apparent from the record. The Tribunal concluded that no fact or argument was overlooked, and the order was based on a thorough examination of the submissions and facts. Therefore, the Tribunal held that there was no mistake apparent from the record and dismissed the Miscellaneous Application.

        Conclusion:
        The Tribunal upheld its original decision, confirming that the assessee received the consideration during the financial year 2010-11 and did not exercise the option under Explanation 2 of Section 11(1). The Tribunal found no mistake apparent from the record in its previous order and dismissed the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found