Ita/39/2017 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - (Exemption) v. Indian Evangelical Team Through
High Court
01 Mar 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Ita/39/2017 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - (Exemption) v. Indian Evangelical Team Through
Date of order
01 Mar 2017
Assessment year(s)
2009-10, 1994-95, 1992-93, 1993-94
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/39/2017 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax - (Exemption) v. Indian Evangelical Team Through, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
$~2
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ITA 39/2017 & CM No. 2420/2017COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX –(EXEMPTION)..... Appellant
..... Appellant
Through: Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Adv.
versus
INDIAN EVANGELICAL TEAMThrough
..... Respondent
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHATHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRIO R D E R%01.03.2017
The ITAT in this appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 endorsed the opinion of the CIT(A) that theassessee was entitled to claim charbitable status under Section 11 ofthe Act. In so holding it relied upon its preview views for AY 2009-10.The ITAT also noted that the question of law urged by theRevenue in that previous year was a subject matter of an appeal thatwas rejected by this Court. In ITA No. 169/2003, pertaining to AY1994-95, whereto the issue related to the benefit of Section 11claimed by the assessee, the Court had observed as follows:
“..... 2. The appeal filed by the Revenue being ITANo. 6/2002 against the said order of the ITAT for AY1992-93 has already been dismissed by this Court on7[th]April 2011. The Revenue’s appeal ITA 215 of 2002for AY 1993-94, involving the same question, wasdismissed on 24[th]September 2014.
3. In that view of the matter, this appeal is dismissed.The question is answered against the Revenue and infavour of the Assessee....”
In the light of the previous orders – mentioned above, nosubstantial question of law arises. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
MARCH 01, 2017/kk
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.