MALL OF JAIPUR OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that Section 167B(1) of the Act explicitly excludes societies registered under the Societies Registration Act from the application of MMR. Therefore, the assessee should be assessed at normal slab rates and not MMR.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a registered welfare society, filed its return of income offering interest income and computed tax at the Maximum Marginal Rate (MMR) with no surcharge. The AO/CPC processed the return, accepted the income, but levied surcharge at 25% on the total tax computed at MMR.
What were the issues?
Whether a registered welfare society is liable to be taxed at the Maximum Marginal Rate (MMR) and whether the surcharge levied by the AO/CPC was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(10)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.
- CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd.202 citing81 ITR 303 · 1971 · HC
- Dattatraya Gopal Bhotte v. CIT23 citing150 ITR 460 · 1984 · HC
- ITO v. Tayal Sales Corporation18 citing1 SOT 579 · 2003 · ITAT
- CIT v. CV Divakaran Family Trust9 citing122 Taxmann 405 · 2002 · HC
- CIT (International Taxation) v. Heidrick and Struggles Inc.7 citing461 ITR 33 · 2024 · HC · Read judgment
- CIT v. C.V. Divakaran Family Trust7 citing254 ITR 222 · 2002 · HC
- Piarelal Sakseria Family Trust v. CIT6 citing136 ITR 583 · 1982
- Clestra Foundation v. ITO5 citing169 Taxmann.com 46 · 2024
- 122 Taxmann 405 (Kerala) 6 NIK Family Trust, Mumbai 2. Gosar Family Trust v. CIT4 citing133 Taxmann 443 · 2003 · HC
- 270 ITR 5934 citing270 ITR 593 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR
Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM
PER DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-5, Mumbai, dated 09.01.2025 for assessment year 2024- 25, passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').
The assessee has raised following grounds:-
“1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A)/NFA
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 167B
- Samaj Sahyogi Sanstha, Jaipur vs Income Tax Officer, JaipurITA 126/JPR/2026[2024-2025]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2024-2025
- The Windsor Flat Owners Welfare… vs ITO, Ward-11(1), HyderabadITA 1385/HYD/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2023-24
- Golden Sports and Recreation Club, Madurai vs ITO, Ncw-1(7), MaduraiITA 2022/CHNY/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2023-24
- Sai Jyot Trust, Mumbai vs DCIT - Circle 32 (1), MumbaiITA 4800/MUM/2026[2023 - 24]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026
- Sorathiya Bramha Kshtriya Samaj, Akola vs ITO Ward 2, Exemp, NagpurITA 187/NAG/2026[2017-2018]Status: Disposed11 Sept 2026AY 2017-2018
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- A.Merchy Clara vs. The Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise (Appeals)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- Nallathambi Thangaraj vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IMadras · 13 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S. Hira Films PVT. LTD. vs. M/S. Prasad Film Labs (Mumbai) Private LimitedBombay · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Jung Bahadur Singh, Through Its Proprietor, Jang Bahadur Singh vs. The Union Of INDIA, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of RevenueJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026