DELHI CHINMAYA SEWA TRUST,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE EXEMPT 1(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3586/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 August 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)4 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the development fee is meant for capital assets and not revenue in nature, following its previous decisions.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 challenges the order that treated development & maintenance charges collection of Rs. 43,24,868/- as revenue receipts.

What were the issues?

Whether development and maintenance charges collected by the assessee are to be treated as revenue receipts or capital receipts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Rai Mehra, FCA
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.08.2025Pronounced: 20.08.2025

2016-17 arises against CIT(A)/ NFAC, Delhi’s order dated 23.04.2025 (DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1075753071(1), in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’.

Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.

2.

Coming to the sole substantive issue herein between the parties, it transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have assessed the assessee’s development & maintenance charges collection of Rs. 43,24,868/- appellate discussion.

3.

That being the case, learned counsel has first of all filed the Delhi state government’s notification/ order dated 11.02.2009 issued u/s 17 read with section 24 of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 and draws my attention to its clause no. 14 that such development fee in fact is meant for capital assets than revenue in nature. This tribunal’s order in Maharishi Markandeshwar Trust v. ACIT dated to 1972/Del/2021 has also reiterated the very principle. I, therefore, see no merit in the lower authorities’ findings assessing the impugned development & maintenance charges collection as taxable under the provisions of the Act. Deleted accordingly.

Order pronounced in open court on 20.08.2025

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →