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

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.

347 ITR 99High Court2012#951 most cited

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.

112

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,735 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v DGIT · 347 ITR 99 · Delhi High Court · Section 2(15) · proviso to Section 2(15) · charitable purpose · advancement of general public utility · business · trade · commerce · exemption

Sections most often in play

Section 1961 Section 2(15)Section 11 Section 143(3)Section 12 Section 11 of the Income-tax Act Section 11(1) of the Income-tax Act Section 11(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 4(3)mutuality principle section 205 section 2(13)advancement of general public utility section 10(23c)(iv)section 36(1)(v)proviso to section 2(15)section 11(6)section 2(11)section 13(8)section 11(4a)

Judgments citing 362 ITR 539 (Gujarat) (d) Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT

Delhi Bureau of Text Books vs. Director of Income Tax (E)

The appeals are allowed but, in the circumstances, with no orders as to costs

ITA/810/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

…xtensively in Institution of Chartered Accountants of India v. Director General of Income Tax ITA Nos. 807, 810, 811, & 812/2015 Page 10 of 19 (Exemptions) (2012) 347 ITR 99 (Del) where the dominant function of the institution was examined in order to determine whether its earnings were for charitable purposes. 16. Finally, Ms. Bansal submitted that the rule of consistency should also apply. She pointed out that from AY 1974-75 till 2005-06, exemption has been granted to the Appellant and with absolutely no ch…

DDIT, Chennai vs. The South Indian Film Chamber of Commerce, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 449/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Respondent: Shri. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…n to conduct business could be established. As per ld. Authorised Representative Kolkata Bench had relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India vs. Director General of Income Tax (Exemptions) 347 ITR 99 while holding that fundamental or dominant function alone was to be considered and not the ancilliary objects. Thus according to him, ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was justified in allowing the claim of the assessee u/s. 11 of the Act. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the 8. material on record. Objects of the assessee…

M/S. Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority, Dehradun vs. CIT, Dehradun

In the result we dismiss the appeal of the assessee

ITA 180/DEL/2013[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2017

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year:

For Appellant: Sh. Mahesh B. Chhibber, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vijay Varma, CIT DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ing factors, it was observed was consequential profit motive or purpose behind the activity and when an activity is trade, commerce or business was elucidated in Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Director-General of Income-tax (Exemptions) [2012] 347 ITR 99 (Delhi) in the following words (page 123) : "Section 2(15) defines the term 'charitable purpose'. 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 intended for the purpose of interpr…

M/S. Akhil Bhartiya Grameen Vikas Sanstha, New Delhi vs. DIT (Exemptions), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1037/DEL/2014[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2016

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaakhil Bhartiya Grameen Vikas Vs Dit(Exemptions) Sanstha New Delhi. 1442, Wazir Nagar, Kotla Mubarakapur, New Delhi. Aaaaa5560E

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business, for a cess or fee or any other consideration" was considered and interpreted by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Institute of Chartered Accountants Of India v. DGIT (Exemptions) 347 ITR 99 (Delhi), as under (page 123): "Section 2(15) defines the term 'charitable purpose'. 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 intended for the purpose of interpreting and ap…

ITO, Chennai vs. Sri Thyaga Brahma Gana Sabha, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 1677/CHNY/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. R. MeenakshisundaramFor Respondent: Shri. Durai Pandian, Addl. CIT

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार",लेखा सद"य एवं "ीजी. पवन कुमार,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1677/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2012-2013. Income Tax Officer, M/s. Sri Thyaga Brahma Gana Sabha, Exemption Ward-4, Vs. No.103, G.N. Chetty Road, Chennai 600 034. T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [PAN AABTS 1159B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. R. Meenakshisundaram, ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent…

DCIT, Cir-1, Kolkata vs. Indian Chamber of Commerce, Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 415/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: : Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sellong Yaden, Addl CIT, ld.DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 13Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA Before : Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member, and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A Nos. 415 & 416/Kol/2016 A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 D.C.I.T (E), Cir-I, Vs. Indian Chamber of Commerce, Kolkata PAN: AAAT 114IG (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant/ department : Shri Sellong Yaden, Addl CIT, ld.DR For the Respondent/ assessee: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA, ld.AR Date of Hearing: 15-06-2016 Date of Pronouncement: 03 -08-2016 ORDER SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM These two appeals of the Revenue arises out of the common order dated 23-…

Andhra Chamber of Commerce, Chennai vs. ADIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 164/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.164/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S. Andhra Chamber Of Commerce, The Assistant Director Of No. 23, Third Cross Street, Vs. Income Tax [Exemptions] - Iii, West Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 035. [Pan: Aaaca7746C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. R. Ilavarasi, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.04.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.07.2016 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Vii, Chennai, Dated 12.09.2014 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2009-10. The First Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is With Regard To Denial Of Exemption Under Section 11 Of The Income Tax Act [“Act” In Short]. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That The Assessee Is Not Entitled To Exemption Under Section 11 Of The Act & Second Ground Relates To Confirmation Of Disallowance Of Depreciation.

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. R. Ilavarasi, JCIT

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘‘डी” "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" Before Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.164/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 M/s. Andhra Chamber of Commerce, The Assistant Director of No. 23, Third Cross Street, Vs. Income Tax [Exemptions] - III, West CIT Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 035. [PAN: AAACA7746C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri R. Vijayaragh…

The Indian Merchants Chambers, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -II(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4076/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.4076/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010) The Indian Merchants Chambers, Vs. Ddit(Exemption)-Ii(1), Imc Building, Imc Marg, Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400020 Parel, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaati 00047 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Arvind Sonde राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.S.Jadhav सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 29/ 06/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)- Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2009-2010. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Is Basically Aggrieved For Decline Of Exemption U/S.11 On The Plea That Proviso To Section 2(15) Was Applicable To The Assessee Which Was Introduced W.E.F. Assessment Year 2009-2010. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is Registered As A Company U/S.25 Of The Companies Act, 1956. The Main Objects Of The Assessee Trust Inter Alia Are To Promote, Advance & Protect Trade, Commerce & Industry In India. The Ao Held That The Assessee Was Not Imparting Education In Pursuance Of Its Objects. He Held That The Activity Of Organizing Seminars, The Definition Of Education. The Assessee Was Running Certain Seminars

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri V.S.Jadhav

Section 11Section 2(15)Section 25Section 28

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ‘आई’, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.4076/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2009-2010) The Indian Merchants Chambers, Vs. DDIT(Exemption)-II(1), IMC Building, IMC Marg, Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400020 Parel, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAATI 00047 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Arvind Sonde राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri V.S.Jadhav सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/…

Indo French Chamber of Commerce & Industry, Mumbai vs. ADIT-(E)-II(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and that of revenue is dismissed

ITA 386/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm Indo French Chamber Of Commerce & Vs. Assistant Director Of Income-Tax, Industry Exemption-11(1), Piramal French Bank Bldg., 4Th Flr. 62, Homji Chamber, Mumbai-400 012. Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001. (Pan: Aaati2658A) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv M. ShahFor Respondent: Shri vishwas Jadhav, DR

Section 11Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM Indo French Chamber of Commerce & Vs. Assistant Director of Income-tax, Industry Exemption-11(1), Piramal French Bank Bldg., 4th Flr. 62, Homji chamber, Mumbai-400 012. Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001. (PAN: AAATI2658A) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assistant Director of Income-tax, Vs. Indo French Chamber of Exemption-11(1), Piramal chamber, Commerce & Industry Mumbai-400 012. French Bank Bldg., 4th Flr. 62, Homji Street, Fort, Mumbai- 400001. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanjiv M. Shah Revenu…

ADIT (E) II-1, Mumbai vs. Indo French Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed and that of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1122/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv M. ShahFor Respondent: Shri vishwas Jadhav, DR

Section 11Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

M/S. Rubber Skill Development Council, New Delhi vs. DIT(E), New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is ·allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3216/DEL/2014[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2015

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Gopal Nathani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Nandita Kanchan, CIT (DR)

Section 12ASection 25

DDIT (E), Delhi vs. M/S. All India Football Federation, New Delhi

ITA 6352/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 11Section 2(15)

…r object of general public utility." (Emphasis supplied) 20. A recent decision deals specifically with the newly amended section 2(15) of the Act, in the case of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Director General of Income-tax (Exemptions) [2012] 347 ITR 99/202 Taxman 1/13 taxmann.com 175 Delhi HC, laying down the very same principle held as under: "that the fundamental or dominant function of the Institute was to exercise overall control and regulate the activities of the members/enrolled chartered accountants. A very narrow view had been taken that the Institute was holding coaching classes and th…