SHREE PARMATMACHAND BHANDARI HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE,JODHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that operating medical mobile units under a government contract for medical relief does not convert the activity into business. The source of funding or contractual mechanism does not alter the charitable nature of medical relief, and TDS under section 194C is merely a procedural mechanism.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a Section 8 company with objects of medical relief, was denied regular registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and had its provisional registration cancelled. The CIT(E) cited the operation of medical mobile units under a government contract, TDS under section 194C, and alleged non-genuineness and siphoning of funds as reasons.
What were the issues?
Whether operating medical relief activities under a government contract constitutes business, and if alleged non-genuineness and payments to related parties are grounds for denying registration.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 2(15),Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii),Section 13(1)(c),Section 13(3),Section 194C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON’BLE & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE
PER BENCH: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 07.02.2026 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur [“Ld. CIT(E)”], whereby the assessee’s application for regular registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been rejected and the provisional registration granted earlier on 06.08.2022 under section 12A(1)(ac)(vi) has also been cancelled.
The assessee is a Section 8 company whose objects, as contained in its Memorandum of Association, are exclusively in the field of medical relief and 2 Asst. Year: 2026-27 healthcare. The principal object, inter alia, is to establish, maintain and run hospitals, nursing
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 2(15)
- Ss Early Learning Society, Hyderabad vs CIT (Exemption), HyderabadITA 1208/HYD/2025[2026-27]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2026-27
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2448/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2447/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), MohaliITA 636/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 635/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S A2Z Infra Engineering LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026