THE GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)

PDF · subscribers
ITA/46/2018HC KeralaKLHC01063077201831 August 2021Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM6 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala noted that the assessee's counsel informed the Court that the assessee has availed the benefit of the 'Vivad se Vishwas' scheme. Consequently, the assessee stated that they do not wish to press the appeals. The Court recorded this statement. As a result, the appeals were dismissed as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the issues raised in the appeals. The Court also stated that there would be no order as to costs.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by the Greater Cochin Development Authority (the assessee) against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) (the revenue). The appeals were against orders passed by the ITAT, Cochin Bench. The specific assessment years are not mentioned in the provided text. The High Court of Kerala heard the appeals. The procedural history indicates that these appeals were admitted and heard together.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee is entitled to claim exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year(s) in question. 2. Whether the income derived from the property held by the assessee is to be treated as income from business or as income from property, for the purpose of exemption. Assessee's Contentions: The assessee contended that it is a public charitable trust and its income is eligible for exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. They argued that the activities undertaken by the authority are for charitable purposes and do not constitute business activities. They relied on various judicial pronouncements to support their claim for exemption. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue contended that the activities of the assessee, particularly the income generated from property, should be treated as income from business and therefore not eligible for exemption under Section 11. They argued that the assessee is engaged in commercial activities and the income derived is taxable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 9TH BHADRA, 1943 ITA NO. 44 OF 2018 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 177/Coch/2017 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: THE GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY S.A.ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM - 682 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MRS.USHAKUMARI P.R. ERNAKULAM BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR SREEJITH R.NAIR RESPONDENT/APPELLANT: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), KOCHI - 682 018. ERNAKULAM BY ADVS. SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT KMV.PANDALAI THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.08.2021, ALONG WITH ITA.46/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Ita Nos.44 & 46 OF 2018 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 9TH BHADRA, 1943 ITA NO. 46 OF 2018 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 178/COCH/2017 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: THE GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, S.A ROAD KADAVANTHRA ERNAKULAM-682020 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MRS.USHAKUMARI P.R BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR SREEJITH R.NAIR MEKHALA M.BENNY ACHYUT K PADMARAJ RESPONDENT/APPELLANT: THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) (EXEMPTION) KOCHI 682018 OTHER PRESENT: SC CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.08.2021, ALONG WITH ITA.44/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Ita Nos.44 & 46 OF 2018 3 JUDGMENT [ITA Nos.44/2018, 46/2018] S.V.Bhatti, J. Heard Sri.Anil D.Nair and learned Standing counsel Sri.Christopher Abraham for parties. Learned counsel Mr.Anil D.Nair informs the Court that the assessee has availed the benefit of 'vivad se viswas' and the assessee does not want to press the appeals. Statement is placed on record. Appeals are dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.

Sd/- S.V.BHATTI JUDGE Sd/- VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE css/

Ita Nos.44 & 46 OF 2018 4 APPENDIX OF ITA 44/2018 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE-A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18/3/2015 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ANNEXURE-B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ANNEXURE-C TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPEAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE A.Y.2011-12 ANNEXURE-D TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 1/3/2018 FOR THE YEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT

Ita Nos.44 & 46 OF 2018 5 APPENDIX OF ITA 46/2018 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DTD. 17.3.2015 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 DT. 28.2.2017 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE INCOME TAX APPEAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE A.Y. 2012-13 ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 1.3.2018 FOR THE YEAR 2012-13 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT

Ita Nos.44 & 46 OF 2018 6

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →