COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BIHAR vs. BANKIPUR CLUB LTD.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Bankipur Club Ltd. and other similar entities, were registered as non-profit companies under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956. They received amounts from their members for drinks, refreshments, accommodation, admission fees, and periodical subscriptions. The Memoranda of Association stipulated that any surplus on winding up would be distributed among members or transferred to a similar association. The assessees claimed these surplus receipts were not taxable income as they operated as "mutual clubs" and not engaged in "trading activities." The Revenue contended that these surplus receipts constituted taxable income. The High Court ruled in favour of the assessees, holding that the receipts were charges for privileges and amenities provided without profit motive, and thus exempt from tax. The Revenue appealed this decision.
What did the Supreme Court hold?
The Tribunal held that the receipts for various facilities extended by the clubs to their members, as part of the usual privileges, advantages, and conveniences attached to membership, cannot be considered a "trading activity." Consequently, the surplus, which is the excess of receipts over expenditure arising from a mutual arrangement, cannot be treated as "income" for the purposes of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal acknowledged that determining the point at which the relationship of mutuality ends and trading begins is a complex question of fact, influenced by various factors. However, in this specific case, the High Court's findings that the amounts received were charges for privileges and amenities provided without profit motive, and were not tainted with commerciality, were upheld. The appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the surplus receipts of member's clubs, derived from providing drinks, refreshments, accommodation, admission fees, and periodical subscriptions to their members, constitute taxable income under Section 28(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the clubs are registered as non-profit companies and operate on the principle of mutuality. Assessee's contention: The assessees argued that their activities were not "trading activities" but rather a mutual arrangement for the benefit of members. They contended that the surplus generated was not profit but an excess of contributions over expenditure, and therefore not taxable income. Revenue's contention: The Revenue contended that even surplus receipts from members for facilities provided by the clubs should be considered "income" and thus taxable. They argued that the clubs were engaged in activities that generated surplus, which should be treated as profits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BIHAR v. BANKIPUR CLUB LTD. MAY 8, 1997 [KS. PARIPOORNAN ANDS. SAGHIR AHMAD, JJ.] Income Tax Act, 1961: Section 28(i). A B Income tax-AYs. 1960-61 to 1964-65, 1974-75 to 1976-77, 1982-83, 1985-86 to 1989-90-Member's clubs/social action groups-Registered as non- C profit companies under S.25 of Companies Act-Such clubs received from their members amounts for supply of drinks, refreshments etc. as part of usual privileges, advantages and conveniences available to members or by way of admission fees and periodical subscriptions-Memoranda of Association provided for distribution amongst members, or transfer to· a similar associa- D tion as detennined by members, of the surplus amount, if any, on winding up or dissolution of clubs-Profits-Surplus receipts of-Taxability of-Held: Under such circumstances, the said receipts from members, not a "trading activity''-Theref ore, the excess of such receipts over expenditure, not a taxable income.
Section 2~Income tax-Income from house property-Ays. 1977-78 and 1978-79-Member's clubs/social action groups-Registered as non-profit companies under S.25 of Companies Act-Accommodation in the buildings
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 28(i)
- ACIT Circle 20 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs Diamond Developers, MumbaiITA 2105/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
- A.T. Kearney Limited, Gurgaon vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New DelhiITA 1933/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed15 Jul 2026AY 2022-23
- Dell International Services India Private… vs DCIT, Circle-2(2)(1), BangaloreITA 2890/BANG/2025[2024-25]Status: Disposed20 Apr 2026AY 2024-25
- Dell International Services India Private… vs DCIT, Circel-2(2)(1), BangaloreITA 2889/BANG/2025[2023-24]Status: Disposed20 Apr 2026AY 2023-24
- DCIT, Gurgaon vs Orient Craft Ltd., New DelhiITA 3202/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: Disposed20 Mar 2026AY 2011-12
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tvl. S.G. Fab vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 6 Oct 2026
- Meghnath Kapri vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- Meghnath Kapri vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- Nithil Agarwal vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- Navneet Singh vs. The State Of Jharkhand Through Chief Secretary, Government Of JharkhandJharkhand · 6 Oct 2026