{"id":38474,"date":"2024-01-29T13:57:12","date_gmt":"2024-01-29T08:27:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/pcit-e-v-rashtreeya-sikshana-samithi-trust-2023-294-taxman-349-334-ctr-705-karn-hc\/"},"modified":"2024-01-29T13:57:12","modified_gmt":"2024-01-29T08:27:12","slug":"pcit-e-v-rashtreeya-sikshana-samithi-trust-2023-294-taxman-349-334-ctr-705-karn-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/pcit-e-v-rashtreeya-sikshana-samithi-trust-2023-294-taxman-349-334-ctr-705-karn-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"PCIT (E) v. Rashtreeya Sikshana Samithi Trust (2023) 294 Taxman 349 \/ 334 CTR 705 (Karn.)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee is an educational trust filed its return of income claiming exemption under section 11 of the Act. The \u00a0Assessing Officer denied benefit of section 11 to assessee on ground that assessee had collected capitation fee in violation of Karnataka Educational Institution (Prohibition of capitation fee) Act, 1984. The assessee had \u00a0filed an affidavit stating that no action was initiated against it by State for any violation under said Act. The\u00a0 Tribunal held that\u00a0 the Assessing Officer, based on assumption and surmise, had held that there was violation under KEI (Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act by assessee. Tribunal also held that department had issued certificate under section 12A to assessee. Accordingly the denial of exemption. was not justified. On appeal by the Revenue, High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal. Followed\u00a0 Kammavari Sangham v. Dy. CIT (E) (2023) 146 taxmann.com 367 (Karn)(HC) \u00a0\u00a0(AY. 2012-13)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Capitation Fee-No action was initiated against by State for any violation of the  Act-Certificate was issued under section. 12A of the Act-Denial exemption is held to be not justified.[S. 12, 12A,  Karnataka Educational Institution (Prohibition of capitation fee) Act, 1984] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-38474","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-a0y","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38474","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=38474"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38474\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":38475,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38474\/revisions\/38475"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=38474"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=38474"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=38474"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}