KANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,KANPUR vs. ADDL.CIT, EXEMPTION RANGE, GHAZIABAD

ITA 2202/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 March 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)14 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's activities were not hit by Section 2(15) and thus eligible for exemption. It also ruled that infrastructure and FAR funds, as well as contributions to Awas Bandhu, were allowable as application of income.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a development authority, was denied exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with its surplus income being taxed at the maximum marginal rate. The Assessing Officer also made additions on account of infrastructure fund, FAR fund, and contribution to Awas Bandhu.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee authority is eligible for exemption under Section 11 and 12, and whether certain funds and contributions are to be treated as taxable income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11,Section 12,Section 12A,Section 2(15),Section 13(8)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(8)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, /AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

For Appellant: Shri Dayainder Singh
For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM ; The captioned appeals filed by the assesse have been directed against the separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhiall dated 22.06.2023pertaining to assessment years2015-16, 20016-17 & 2017-18. Since common grounds have been raised, except the difference in figures, in these appeals, hence, we are dealing with the facts of the assessment year 2015-16, being lead case and the decision thereof will apply mutatis mutandis to other assessment years i.e.

2016-17 and 2017-18 as well. The grounds raised i

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 11

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →