KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE-1, , BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee is a taxable entity due to its profit-making activities, aligning with previous decisions and Supreme Court pronouncements on commercial activities of entities claiming charitable status. Consequently, the exemption under Section 11 was denied.
What were the facts?
The Karnataka Housing Board (KHB), established to provide affordable housing, claimed exemption under Section 11. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the exemption, treating its activities, particularly auction sales, as commercial and profit-oriented, thus hitting the proviso to Section 2(15). Depreciation claimed was also disallowed.
What were the issues?
Whether the activities of the Karnataka Housing Board are commercial in nature, disentitling it to exemption under Section 11, and if the proviso to Section 2(15) is applicable. Also, whether interest under Sections 234A and 234B is leviable.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 11,Section 2(15),Section 13(8),Section 234A,Section 234B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority390 citing449 ITR 1 · 2022 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY
PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against the orders of the 1d. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 18.02.2025 vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1073418441(1) for the assessment year 2021-22 and vide Order dated 31.1.2025 with DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1072790068(1) for the assessment year 2015-16 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”). Since the issues in both the appeals are similar, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.
First, we take
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.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Doddaballapur Planning Authority, Bangalore vs ITO, Exemption, Ward-3, BangaloreBangalore25 Jun 2025Dismissed
Also relies on ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
The Tribunal held that valid registration under Section 12AA/12AB of the Act is a mandatory precondition for claiming exemption under Section 11. Therefore, the assessee's claim for exemption on betterment and rejuvenati...
- Deputy Commissioner of Income… vs Otters Club, MumbaiMumbai21 Mar 2025Dismissed
Also relies on ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
The Tribunal held that the assessee is a charitable institution promoting sports, which falls under the object of general public utility. It ruled that the club's activities were not commercial and that the proviso to Se...
- ITO(Exmp)-2(4), Mumbai vs Mehli Mehta Music Foundation, MumbaiMumbai22 Nov 2024Dismissed
Also relies on ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
The Tribunal held that the Foundation's activities of imparting music education and organizing concerts were incidental to its primary object of advancing education. It followed previous decisions in the assessee's own c...
- Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption)… vs Saurashtra Trust, MumbaiMumbai30 Sept 2024Dismissed
Also relies on ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, holding that only business income is hit by the proviso to Section 2(15). Other income not derived from commercial activity remains eligible for exemption under Section 11, e...
- Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax(Exemption)… vs Saurashtra Trust, MumbaiMumbai22 Jul 2024Dismissed
Also relies on ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was justified in allowing exemption under Section 11 for other income. The issue of whether the proviso to Section 2(15) was attracted was considered academic in this case.
More judgments on Section 11
- Desire Foundation, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 1646/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Mata Lachmi Rotary Charitable Society… vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward - 1…ITA 310/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Shiva Shiksha Samiti, Deendayal Puram, Up… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Agra…ITA 415/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Sweekar, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 1, Exemp, NagpurITA 531/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Sweekar, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 1, Exemp, NagpurITA 530/NAG/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
