564 4 Bangalore Development Authority v. ACIT (176 ITD 833) 5 Hoshiarpur Improvement Trust v. ITO (

101 Taxmann.com 453Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2019#10046 most cited

What is 564 4 Bangalore Development Authority v. ACIT (176 ITD 833) 5 Hoshiarpur Improvement Trust v. ITO ( authority for?

Corpus donations are eligible for exemption under sections 11 and 12, even if treated as revenue receipts.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Bangalore Development Authority v. ACIT · sections 11 · 12 · corpus donation · exemption · revenue receipt

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12Section 12A(a)Section 13(8)Section 2(15)Section 2(24)(iia)Section 250

Judgments citing 564 4 Bangalore Development Authority v. ACIT (176 ITD 833) 5 Hoshiarpur Improvement Trust v. ITO (

Dudhsagar Research and Dement Association, Mehsana vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1, Exemption, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 203/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S N Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 13(8)Section 2(15)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.202&203/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dudhsagar Research and Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Dement Association Income Tax, C/o. Dudhsagar Dairy, Circle-1, Exemption, Highway Mehsana, Ahmedabad Mehsana-384002 [PAN No.AAATD1312J] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S N Divatia, AR Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR 17.09.2025 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 17.11.2025 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: These appe…

Dudhsagar Research and Dement Association, Mehsana vs. The Dy.CIT, Cicle-1, Exemption, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 202/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S N Divatia, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 13(8)Section 2(15)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.202&203/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dudhsagar Research and Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Dement Association Income Tax, C/o. Dudhsagar Dairy, Circle-1, Exemption, Highway Mehsana, Ahmedabad Mehsana-384002 [PAN No.AAATD1312J] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S N Divatia, AR Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR 17.09.2025 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 17.11.2025 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: These appe…

The Jewellers Association, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 197/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jul 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2Section 36

…ndation for seeking exemption of section 11, though not conclusive. In other words the registration under section 12A is sine qua non for eligibility of benefit of section 11. The coordinate bench of Tribunal in Gujarat Cricket Association 15 JCCIT (E) [20191 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd-Trib) held that where predominant object of various cricket associations was to promote cricket and profit earning was not predominant purpose proviso to section 2 (15) could not have been invoked to decline benefit of sections 11 and 12. It was further held that amounts received under TV subsidy by assessee cricket association from…

ACIT (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. The Surat District Cricket Association, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 165/SRT/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) Asst. Commissioner Of The Surat District Cricket Income-Tax (Exemptions), Association, Lalbhai Vs Circle-2, 6Th Floor, Room Contractor Stadium, Surat No.607, Aayakar Bhavan Dumas Road, Vesu, (Vejalpur), Prahlad Nagar Surat-395007 Road, Nr. Sachin Tower, Pan : Aaatt 6114 A Satellite,Ahmedabad-380 015 Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Hearing in Virtual Court) Asst. Commissioner of The Surat District Cricket Income-Tax (exemptions), Association, Lalbhai Vs Circle-2, 6th Floor, Room Contractor Stadium, Surat No.607, Aayakar Bhavan Dumas Road, Vesu, (Vejalpur), Prahlad Nagar Surat-395007 Road, Nr. Sachin Tower, PAN : AAATT 6114 A Satellite,Ahmedabad-380 015 Appellant / Revenue Respondent / assessee Assessee by Shri Esmayeel Saherwala, CA Revenue by Shri H.P. Meena, CIT-DR Date of hearing 14.03.2022 Date…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4395/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…dered in Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v ACIT 396 ITR 323 (Guj) @ Pg. 14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view in the case of 1-Joshiarpur has been considered and approved by the P & H HC. Further, the Tribunal in this has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee therein was purchasing land at…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4394/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…dered in Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v ACIT 396 ITR 323 (Guj) @ Pg. 14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view in the case of 1-Joshiarpur has been considered and approved by the P & H HC. Further, the Tribunal in this has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee therein was purchasing land at…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4393/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…dered in Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v ACIT 396 ITR 323 (Guj) @ Pg. 14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view in the case of 1-Joshiarpur has been considered and approved by the P & H HC. Further, the Tribunal in this has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee therein was purchasing land at…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4392/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…dered in Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v ACIT 396 ITR 323 (Guj) @ Pg. 14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view in the case of 1-Joshiarpur has been considered and approved by the P & H HC. Further, the Tribunal in this has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee therein was purchasing land at…

Mumbai Metroplitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. DDIT (E) -1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and revenue is dismissed

ITA 4391/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…dered in Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v ACIT 396 ITR 323 (Guj) @ Pg. 14, Jhansi Development Authority v. DCIT, C-4 (123 taxmann.com 247) and DCIT v Mumbai Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd. (ITA No. 2880/M/2019). In the case of, Gujarat Cricket Association v JCIT 101 Taxmann.com 453 (Ahd) @ para 37 (Pg. 314 of LPB) the Tribunal has held that the decision of Jalandhar Development Authority not a binding precedent as the contrary view in the case of 1-Joshiarpur has been considered and approved by the P & H HC. Further, the Tribunal in this has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee therein was purchasing land at…

Baroda Cricket Association, Vadodara vs. The Dy. CIT, (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1435/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Sharma, CIT/ D.R
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 2(15)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 234BSection 271Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA. No: 1435/AHD/2017 (Assessment Years: 2013-14) M/s. Baroda Cricket V/S Deputy Commissioner of Association, BCA House Income Tax (Exemptions), 78, Race Course, Circle-2, Ahmedabad Vadodara, 390007 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAAAB1410E Appellant by : Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. Respondent by : Shri O.P. Sharma, CIT/ D.R. (आदेश)/ORDER Date of hearing : 13-06-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 10-07-2019 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. This appeal filed…

564 4 Bangalore Development Authority v. ACIT (176 ITD 833) 5 Hoshiarpur Improvement Trust v. ITO ( (101 Taxmann.com 453) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax