Which sections of the Income Tax Act does 362 ITR 539 (Gujarat) (d) Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 2(15), Section 11, Section 143(3), Section 12, Section 11 of the Income-tax Act.

362 ITR 539 (Gujarat) (d) Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT (347 ITR 99)

Q: What is 362 ITR 539 (Gujarat) (d) Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT authority for?

The broad definition of 'business' should not be applied when interpreting the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as the object and purpose of the section must be considered.

Q: How many judgments cite 362 ITR 539 (Gujarat) (d) Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT?

112 judgments on BharatTax cite 362 ITR 539 (Gujarat) (d) Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT (347 ITR 99), spanning 2015 to 2026.

J.K.Trust Bombay, Mumbai vs. DCIT (E) 2 (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1564/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1564/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri NiranjanFor Respondent: Shri Bharti Singh

Section 12ASection 142Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 2(15)

…f trade, commerce or business but are carried out under the guise of activities in the nature of public utility'. 20 I.T.A. No. 1564 & 3084/Mum/2019 J. K. Trust Bombay 13. Delhi High Court in case of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT [2012] 347 ITR 99/[20111.202 Taxman 1/13 taxmann.Com 175 considered these very provisions in the context of activities of the Institute of Chartered Accountants holding that the fundamental or dominant function of the Institute was to exercise overall control and regulate the activities of the members/enrolled chartered accountants and merely because the Institute…

DCIT (E) 2 (1), Mumbai vs. J.K.Trust Bombay, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 3084/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1564/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri NiranjanFor Respondent: Shri Bharti Singh

Section 12ASection 142Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 2(15)

…f trade, commerce or business but are carried out under the guise of activities in the nature of public utility'. 20 I.T.A. No. 1564 & 3084/Mum/2019 J. K. Trust Bombay 13. Delhi High Court in case of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT [2012] 347 ITR 99/[20111.202 Taxman 1/13 taxmann.Com 175 considered these very provisions in the context of activities of the Institute of Chartered Accountants holding that the fundamental or dominant function of the Institute was to exercise overall control and regulate the activities of the members/enrolled chartered accountants and merely because the Institute…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Association of State Road Transport Undertakings, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 643/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri Tarandeep Singh, Adv. & Shri

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…herein the Tribunal following the ratio and principle laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indian Trade Promotion Organization vs. DIT (E), [2015-TIOL-227-HC- DEL-IT] and in the case of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India vs. DGIT, 347 ITR 99 (Del), held that assessee’s activities are not in the nature of trade, commerce or business and assessee society is eligible for benefit of section 11. 5. Ld. DR on the other hand, relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer. 6. From the perusal of the impugned orders and material placed on record, we find that the objects of the assessee was…

Rajastha Gau Sewa Sangh, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 113/JPR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 748/Jp/2015 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2009-10 (U/S 254/12Aa(1)(B)Of I.T. Act 1961) Cuke M/S. Rajasthan Gau Seva Sangh The Cit(Exemptions) Vs. Durgapura, Tonk Road,Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@ Pan/Gir No.: Aaatr 0809 E Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 113/Jp/2014 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2009-10 Cuke M/S. Rajasthan Gau Seva Sangh The Ito Vs. Durgapura, Tonk Road, Jaipur Ward- 6(2),Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@ Pan/Gir No.: Aaatr 0809 E Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Manish Agarwal, Ca & Shri O.P. Agarwal, Ca Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta, Cit-Dr Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 10/12/2019 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 07 /02/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm These Two Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Dated 11-09-2015 Of Ld. Cit(Exemptions), Jaipur Passed U/S 12Aa(1)(B) Of The Act As Well As Order Dated 17-12-2013 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Ii, Jaipur

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal, CA and Shri O.P. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(a)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 254

…commerce or business but are carried out under the guise of activities in the nature of 'public utility'. Delhi High Court in case of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India & Anr. Vs. Director General of Income-Tax (Exemption) and Ors. reported in (2012) 347 ITR 99 (Delhi) considered these very provisions in the context of activities of the Institute of Chartered Accountants holding that the fundamental or dominant function of the Institute was to exercise overall control and regulate the activities of the members / enrolled chartered accountants and merely because the Institute was holding coaching classes…

Devki Devi Foundation, New Delhi vs. DIT (Exemptions), New Delhi

ITA 1027/DEL/2012[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2019

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: -- Devki Devi Foundation, Vs Dit (Exemptions), Plot No.15, 3Rd Floor, 2, Press Enclave Road, Saket, Aayakar Bhawan, New Delhi. Laxmi Nagar District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aaatd5283G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate & Shri Deepesh Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms Nidhi Srivastava, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.10.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2011 Of The Dit (Exemptions), Delhi Withdrawing Registration Granted Earlier U/S 12A Of The It Act Since Inception.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT, DR

Section 12A

…TR 333 - (Del.) Hamdard Laboratories India v. ADIT: 379 ITR 393 (Del.) - Bureau of Indian Standard vs. DGIT(E) : 358 ITR 78 (Del.) - GS1 India vs. DGIT(Exemptions): 262 CTR 585 (Del.) - Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT - (Exemptions): 347 ITR 99 (Del.), DIT (Exemptions) v. Commerce Teachers Association: 203 - Taxman 171 (Del.) CIT v. Sri Magunta Raghava Reddy Charitable Trust: 395 ITR 663 - (Mad.) - Society for Participatory Research In Asia Vs. ITO: ITA No. 1553/Del/2015 (Del Trib.), 26 - India HIV/AIDS Alliance v. CIT: [2019] 175 ITD 1 (Delhi - Trib.) 29. He submitted that the a…

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, the matter is set-aside to the file of the ld CIT(A) after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee corporation

ITA 886/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Suhani Mamodia (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna (JCIT)

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ions would not be affected by the amendment. However no such guide lines were issued. 7.2.4. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Another v. Director General of Income-tax (Exemptions) and Others. [2012] 347 ITR 99 (Del.) held that "The first proviso to section 2(15) introduced with effect from April 1, 2009 applies only if an institution is engaged in advancement of any other object of general public utility and postulates that such an institute is not "charitable" if it is involved in carrying on any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business or…

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, the matter is set-aside to the file of the ld CIT(A) after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee corporation

ITA 885/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Suhani Mamodia (CA)For Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna (JCIT)

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ions would not be affected by the amendment. However no such guide lines were issued. 7.2.4. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Another v. Director General of Income-tax (Exemptions) and Others. [2012] 347 ITR 99 (Del.) held that "The first proviso to section 2(15) introduced with effect from April 1, 2009 applies only if an institution is engaged in advancement of any other object of general public utility and postulates that such an institute is not "charitable" if it is involved in carrying on any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business or…

ACIT(E), New Delhi vs. India International Centre, New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5191/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Angad Gulati, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Janardan Das, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…means that the activities of the Society are commercial in nature. The trade or commerce in the normal course is different than what is required u/s. 2(15) of the I.T. Act. Following judgments are relevant for this proposition - (i) ICAI vs. DGIT(Exemptions), 347 ITR 99 (Del); (ii) DIT(Exemptions) vs. C.A. Study Circle, 347 ITR 321 (Mad.); (iii) Tolani Education Society vs. DIT(Exemptions), (2013) 259 CTR (Bom.) 26 (iv) Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT (Exemption), 358 ITR 78 (Del.); (v) ICAI v. DGIT (Exemptions), 358 ITR 91 (Del.) (vi) DIT (Exemption) v. Sabarmati Ashram, 362 ITR 539 (Guj.) (vii) Council f…

DCIT (Exemption), New Delhi vs. Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas both the cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6617/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Ito(Exemption), Vs. Centre For The Study Of Trust Ward-Iii, New Delhi Developing Societies, 29, Rajpur Road, New Delhi Pan :Aaatc5038N (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.45/Del/2016 [In Ita No.1422/Del/2014] Assessment Year: 2009-10 Centre For The Study Of Vs. Ito(Exemption), Developing Societies, Trust Ward-Iii, New Delhi 29, Rajpur Road, New Delhi Pan :Aaatc5038N (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year:2011-12 Dcit(Exemption), Vs. Centre For The Study Of Circle-1(1), New Delhi Developing Societies, 29, Rajpur Road, New Delhi Pan :Aaatc5038N (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.47/Del/2016 [In Ita No. 6617/Del/2015] Assessment Year: 2011-12 Centre For The Study Of Vs. Dcit(Exemption), Developing Societies, Circle-1(1), New Delhi 29, Rajpur Road, New Delhi Pan :Aaatc5038N (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos.45/Del/2016 & 47/Del/2016

Section 10(23)Section 10(23)(C)Section 12Section 35

…ey or carrying out any consultancy work for the fee to be charged. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly applied the ratio of judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court delivered in the case of ICAI Vs. DGIT(E), 347 ITR 99 (Delhi)-2012 and allowing the relief to the assessee, ignoring that the facts of the case are entirely different. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in accepting the argument of the assessee that the advanced or unspent amount received for ongoing research and project work is not chargeable to…

ITO(E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, whereas both the cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1422/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Ito(Exemption), Vs. Centre For The Study Of Trust Ward-Iii, New Delhi Developing Societies, 29, Rajpur Road, New Delhi Pan :Aaatc5038N (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.45/Del/2016 [In Ita No.1422/Del/2014] Assessment Year: 2009-10 Centre For The Study Of Vs. Ito(Exemption), Developing Societies, Trust Ward-Iii, New Delhi 29, Rajpur Road, New Delhi Pan :Aaatc5038N (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year:2011-12 Dcit(Exemption), Vs. Centre For The Study Of Circle-1(1), New Delhi Developing Societies, 29, Rajpur Road, New Delhi Pan :Aaatc5038N (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No.47/Del/2016 [In Ita No. 6617/Del/2015] Assessment Year: 2011-12 Centre For The Study Of Vs. Dcit(Exemption), Developing Societies, Circle-1(1), New Delhi 29, Rajpur Road, New Delhi Pan :Aaatc5038N (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos.45/Del/2016 & 47/Del/2016

Section 10(23)Section 10(23)(C)Section 12Section 35

…ey or carrying out any consultancy work for the fee to be charged. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly applied the ratio of judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court delivered in the case of ICAI Vs. DGIT(E), 347 ITR 99 (Delhi)-2012 and allowing the relief to the assessee, ignoring that the facts of the case are entirely different. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in accepting the argument of the assessee that the advanced or unspent amount received for ongoing research and project work is not chargeable to…

DCIT(E), New Delhi vs. Professional Assistance for Development Action (Pradan), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3662/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit (E), Vs. M/S. Professional Assistance Circle -2(1), For Development Action New Delhi (Pradan), E-1A, Kailash Colony, New Delhi Pan :Aaatp0345D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri K.V.S.R. Krishna, Ca Respondent By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit(Dr)

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 2(15)

…, merely receiving fee or charge, cannot make the assessee as involved in trade, commerce or business as held in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization Vs. DGIT(E) 53, Taxman.com 404 (Delhi). He further 5 submitted that in the case of ICAI Vs DGIT(E) 347 ITR 99(Del) Hon’ble Court has held that profit motive test should be satisfied for holding whether the entity is engaged in trade or commerce or business and there should be facts and other circumstances which justify that the activity undertaken is in the nature of the business. According to the Ld. counsel the Assessing Officer has failed to justify wi…

Shree Sattar Taluka Sarvamangal Trust, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer (Exemption) Ward-2, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 799/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 2(15)

…s, such an activity cannot be considered to be a business activity. We may, in this regard, usefully refer to the following observations made by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT (Exemption) [2012] 347 ITR 99/[2011] 202 Taxman 1/13 taxmann.com 175. "Therefore, while construing the term 'business' for the said section, the object and purpose of the section has to be kept in mind. We do not think that a very broad and extended definition of the term 'business' is Shree Sattar Taluka Sarvamangal Trust Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2013-14 Page 4 of 5 intende…

M/S Green Educational Society, Bathinda vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Examption), Chandigarh

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 684/ASR/2017[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Jun 2019AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 684/Asr/2017

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. M. P. Singh, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 12A

…n pursuing the same falls for being examined in-as-much as where and to the extent it is profit making, the same may defeat the claim to being a charitable institution. Reference here may with profit be made to the decision in, inter alia, ICAI v. DGIT [2012] 347 ITR 99 (Del), upholding the primacy of the pre-dominant object in pursuing the activity as being determinative of its character, for which reference, among others, stands made by it to Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Mfger’s Ass. [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC). 3.4 The third objection per the impugned order is with regard to the membership of the society, from…

ITO (E), New Delhi vs. M/S National Foundation Trust, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 59/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Bhatia, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sugandha Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2Section 2(15)

…of general utility and hence, benefit cannot be given to the assessee in view of the proviso to section 2 (15). 4. Before the Ld. CIT(A), assessee strongly relied upon the following judgements of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ICAI vs. DGIT (E), 347 ITR 99 (Delhi); and India Trade Promotion Organisation vs. DGIT, 371 ITR 333, (Delhi High Court); and submitted that in view of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, any receipt on account of charging of fees does not tantamount that the assessee is involved in promotion of sport, education and other allied activities and the…