ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority

143 Taxmann.com 278Supreme Court of India2022#190 most cited

What is ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority authority for?

If activities for the advancement of general public utility are carried on as a business, income from such activities is not exempt under Section 11, even if the profits are utilized for the main charitable object. The argument that profits from general public utility activities can be ploughed back to charity to maintain exemption is not a good law.

390

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 372,250 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority · 143 Taxmann.com 278 · Section 2(15) · Section 11 · general public utility · GPU as business · charitable purpose · income exemption · proviso to Section 2(15) · business income for charity · ploughed back income · Section 12A

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Society for Applied Microwave Electronic Engineering Research Bombay, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1427/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income Society For Applied Microwave Tax (Exemptions)-2(1), Electronic Engineering Room No.608, 6Th Floor, Mtnl Research Bombay Vs. Peddar Road, Cumbala Hill, Iit Campus, Hill Slde, Powai, Mumbai-400 026 Mumbai-400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aalas5825K Assessee By : Ms. Ritu Panjabi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.06.2024 26.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Panjabi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR
Section 10(21)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM Dy. Commissioner of Income Society for applied Microwave Tax (Exemptions)-2(1), Electronic Engineering Room No.608, 6th Floor, MTNL Research Bombay Vs. Peddar Road, Cumbala Hill, IIT Campus, Hill Slde, Powai, Mumbai-400 026 Mumbai-400 076 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AALAS5825K Assessee by : Ms. Ritu Panjabi, AR Revenue by : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR Date of hearing: 24.06.2024 26.07.2024 Date of pronouncement : O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: ITA No. 1427/Mum/2024, for A.Y. 2010…

Canara Bank Golden Jubilee Staff Welafare Fund, Bangalore vs. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1034/BANG/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavcanara Bank Golden Jubilee The Commissioner Of Income- Staff Welfare Fund Tax (Exemption) Vs. No.14 Naveen Complex Bangalore. M.G.Road Bangalore – 560 001. Pan: Aaatc1435H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Sri.C.Ramesh, Ca Respondent By: Sri.D.K.Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2024 Pronouncement: 22.07.2024 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm : The Present Appeal Of The Assessee Is Arising From The Order Of The Learned Cit(Exemption), Bangalore Dated 27Th March, 2024 Having Din & Order No.Itba/Exm/F/Exn45/2023-24/ 1063440703(1).

For Appellant: Sri.C.Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Sri.D.K.Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ce or business or any activity of rendering of any service in addition to any trade, commerce or business, it would be covered under the proviso and the bar/prohibition will apply” 10. Recently Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ahemdabad Development Authority 449 ITR 1 (SC) has observed as under:- 202. In the opinion of this court, the change in definition in Section 2(15) and the negative phraseology excluding from consideration, trusts or institutions which provide services in relation to trade, commerce or business, for fee or other consideration has made a difference. Organizing meetings, disseminating inform…

M/S. Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The ADIT, CPC, Bangalore Present Juridiction the Dy. CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 69/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 69/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. Checkmate Adit, Cpc, बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Services Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore Vs. G.F 6-9, Amaan Tower & Suvas Colony, Fatehgunj, Dy.Cit Vadodara, Gujarat, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara 390002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc8465A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri M. R. Sahu, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit. Dr 12/07/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 16/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 08.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2019-20 On 30.09.2019 Declaring Total

For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICAL MEMBER & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 69/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/s. Checkmate ADIT, CPC, बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Services Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore Vs. G.F 6-9, Amaan Tower, & Suvas Colony, Fatehgunj, Dy.CIT Vadodara, Gujarat, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara 390002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACC8465A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri M. R. Sahu, AR अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by…

Printech Park Cluster Bangalore, Chamarajpet vs. CIT Exemptions Bangalore, Bengaluru

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

ITA 840/BANG/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jun 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavprintech Park Cluster-Bangalore The Income Tax Officer #84/1, Kspa-Xil Pttc (Exemption), Ward - 2 6Th Corss, 4Th Main, Vs. Bengaluru Chamarajpet, Bengaluru 560018 Pan – Aabtp8959N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Kupendra Setty, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Anjala Sahu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.06.2024 O R D E R Per: Prakash Chand Yadav, J.M. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Challenges The Din & Order No. Itba/Exm/F/Exm45/2003-24/1063255632(1) Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Cit(A)) Dated 23.03.2024 Passed Under Section 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act).

For Appellant: Shri Kupendra Setty, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Anjala Sahu, CIT-DR
Section 12A

…further contended that the assessee has not applied the funds in furtherance of the 3 Printech Park Cluster-Bangalore objects of GPU. Lastly she relied on the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ahemdabad Urban Development Case reported in 2022] 449 ITR 1 (SC) herein after referred to as AUDA case). 9. After considering the rival submissions, we observe that though the assessee has raised 6, the solitary issue is whether s.12A registration is to be granted to the assessee on the ground that the assessee is engaged in running services in the nature of GPU without charging any exorbitant fees for suc…