Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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 :

        1990 (8) TMI 223 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        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

        Trust beneficiaries denied separate exemptions under laws. Total income computed, deductions allowed, net income apportioned among beneficiaries. The judgment dismissed the appeals, holding that exemptions claimed by beneficiaries under sections 80G, 80L, and 80T could not be granted separately. The ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Trust beneficiaries denied separate exemptions under laws. Total income computed, deductions allowed, net income apportioned among beneficiaries.

                            The judgment dismissed the appeals, holding that exemptions claimed by beneficiaries under sections 80G, 80L, and 80T could not be granted separately. The correct procedure involves computing the trust's total income, allowing deductions under Chapter VIA, and then apportioning the net income among beneficiaries. The interpretation of section 166 was limited to determining the tax payable, not the entire assessment procedure. The court did not follow the Allahabad High Court decision in Smt. Shakuntala Banerjee, relying instead on authoritative judgments of the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Whether exemptions under sections 80G, 80L, and 80T should be granted separately to each beneficiary of a trust.
                            2. The applicability of section 166 for direct assessment of beneficiaries.
                            3. Taxation of capital gains in the hands of beneficiaries versus the trustee.
                            4. Entitlement of beneficiaries to deductions under sections 80G, 80L, and 80T.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Exemptions under Sections 80G, 80L, and 80T for Beneficiaries:
                            The primary issue revolves around whether exemptions under sections 80G, 80L, and 80T should be granted separately to each beneficiary of a trust. The assessees argued that since the assessment was made against each beneficiary under section 166, each should be entitled to separate exemptions. They relied on the Allahabad High Court decision in CIT v. Smt. Shakuntala Banerjee, which supported their claim for separate deductions under section 80L.

                            2. Applicability of Section 166 for Direct Assessment:
                            The contention was that section 166 allows for direct assessment of beneficiaries, implying that each beneficiary should be treated as an assessee for the purpose of exemptions. However, the learned departmental representative argued that section 166 applies only after the total income of the trust is determined, and deductions under Chapter VIA should be allowed while computing the trust's total income, not separately for each beneficiary.

                            3. Taxation of Capital Gains:
                            The judgment examined whether capital gains should be taxed in the hands of the beneficiaries or the trustee. It was determined that the trustee, as the legal owner of the trust properties, should be assessed for capital gains. The rationale was that the capital gains, once realized by the trustee, merge into the total income of the trust and lose their independent identity. This position is supported by the Supreme Court's decision in James Anderson v. CIT and the Calcutta High Court's decision in CIT v. Alfred Herbert (India) (P.) Ltd.

                            4. Entitlement of Beneficiaries to Deductions:
                            The judgment concluded that beneficiaries are not entitled to separate deductions under sections 80G, 80L, and 80T. The reasoning was that these deductions should be allowed while computing the total income of the trust, and the beneficiaries' liability arises only after the total income is ascertained. The Bombay High Court's decision in CIT v. Balwantrai Jethalal Vaidya and the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. H.E.H. Mir Osman Ali Bahadur were cited to support this view. These decisions clarified that section 166 comes into play only at the stage of determining the tax payable on the total income, not during the computation of income.

                            Conclusion:
                            The judgment dismissed the appeals, holding that the exemptions claimed by the beneficiaries under sections 80G, 80L, and 80T could not be granted to them separately. The correct procedure is to compute the total income of the trust, allow the deductions under Chapter VIA, and then apportion the net income among the beneficiaries. The interpretation of section 166 was restricted to determining the amount of tax payable, not the entire assessment procedure. The Allahabad High Court's decision in Smt. Shakuntala Banerjee was not followed as it did not consider the authoritative judgments of the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found