Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11, Section 2(15), Section 12, Section 12A, Section 13(8), Section 143(3).

Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association (121 ITR 1)

Q: What is Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association authority for?

A charitable institution, whose predominant object is general public utility, can engage in non-charitable activities yielding incidental profits, provided these profits are deployed to achieve the dominant charitable object. A subsidiary object, if ancillary to the primary charitable purpose, does not negate the institution's charitable character.

Q: How many judgments cite Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association?

328 judgments on BharatTax cite Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association (121 ITR 1), spanning 2001 to 2026.

The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/s.Mold-Tek Technologies Ltd

ITTA/273/2011HC Telangana29 Feb 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Director of Income Tax vs. M/S Group Vocational

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/199/2015HC Karnataka23 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

Section 12ASection 12aSection 13Section 2(15)Section 260

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S. SUJATHA ITA No.199/2015 BETWEEN: DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), C R BUILDINGS QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. ….APPELLANT (BY SRI:E I SANMATHI, ADV) AND: M/S. GROUP VOCATIONAL TRAINING CENTRE TRUST B H ROAD, OPP:BESCOM LTD., CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TUKMKUR-572214. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT:JINITA CHATTERJEE, ADV FOR MR.PARTHASARATHI, ADV) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION…

M/S. Rolls- Royce India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, this ground

ITA 1310/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Shri A.T. Varkey:Asstt. Yr: 2010-11 Rolls-Royce India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-21(2), 2Nd Floor, Birla Tower West, New Delhi. 25, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aabcr 5277 Q ( Appellant ) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Pradeep Dinodia Fca & Shri R.K. Kapoor Ca. & Shri Anubhav Jaggi Ca Respondent By : Sh. Amrendra Kumar Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 17/09/2015. Date Of Order : 03/12/2015. O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M..: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Assessment Order Passed By The Dcit, Circle-15(1), New Delhi Pursuant To Drp Directions U/S 143(3)/144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised: 1. That The Ld. Tpo & Consequently Drp/Ao Has Erred In Law & On Facts In The Circumstances Of The Case In Confirming & Enhancing The Addition On Account Of Arms' Length Price Under Section 92Ca(3) Of The Income-Tax Act Amounting To Rs. 3,71,14,107/- On Wholly Illegal, Erroneous & Untenable Grounds.

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinodia FCA &For Respondent: Sh. Amrendra Kumar CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…bearing and non-technical, the comparables should have been selected accordingly, even if for bench marking the TNMM method was to be applied in respect of technical as well as business support services. 20. Ld. counsel further referred to the decision in 121 ITR 1 to submit that dominant objective test has to be applied in such circumstances. 21. In support of his contention ld. counsel relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Rampgreen Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 2015-TII-33-HC-Delhi-TP, wherein it has been, inter alia, held that 22. As regards the exclusion of ICRA Management and Denave…

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

…t a charitable institution falling under the residuary clause should be wholly, substantially or in part be funded by voluntary contributions only. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers’ Association (1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC) has held as under (page 25): “The test which has, therefore, now to be applied is whether the predominant object of the activity involved in carrying out the object of general public utility is to sub serve the charitable purpose or to earn profit. Where profit- making is the predominant object of the activity, the purpose, though an object…

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Aipeccs Society

ITA/924/2009HC Delhi07 Oct 2015

For Appellant: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent: Mr Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with

Section 10Section 158BSection 260A

…activity for profit would be satisfied if profit making is not the real object”. 55. The aforesaid view was reiterated by the Supreme Court in a later decision in Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association: (1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC), wherein the Supreme Court applied the predominant object test for determining whether the 2015:DHC:8430-DB ITA 705/2008, 924/2009 & W.P.(C) 3797/2011 Page 46 of 71 Assessee existed solely for charitable purposes or for making profit. The Supreme Court observed as under:- “The test which has, therefore, now to be applie…

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)

…scope and ambit of ‘charity’. The ratio laid down in this case was followed again in the case of Five Judges decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association 121 ITR 1, which held as under vide pages Nos.11 and 12: “……….The law is well settled that if there are several objects of a trust or institution, some of which are charitable and some non charitable and the trustees or the managers in their discretion are to apply the income or property to any of those objects, the trust or institution would not be liable t…

Karnataka Water Supply & Drainage Board vs. CIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 283/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Sept 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anurag Sahay, CIT-III(DR)

Section 11Section 2(15)

…g profit. For this purpose, reliance was placed on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Loka Shikshana Trust Vs. CIT reported in 101 ITR 234 Page 12 of 24 (SC) and CIT (Addl) Vs. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association reported in 121 ITR 1 (SC). It was submitted that having regard to the fact that the Assessee serves only the State Government and local area bodies only to comply with the obligations thrust on it by the Constitution of India; further, the assessee is actually incurring losses on its operations. It was also submitted that the assessee has to follow the directions, ru…

Civil Contractors Association, Mangalore vs. ITO, Mangalore

ITA 670/BANG/2014[N.A.]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2015

Bench: Smt Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Shri Edmond D’Souza, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT-DR-I

Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.670 & 671(BNG.)/2014 Civil Contractors Association, D.K.Mangalore D.No.1 N-12-741/14(2), First Floor, Raghu Building, Urwastores, Mangalore Appellant PAN No.AABAC7565N Vs The Income-tax Officer Ward-1(1), Mangalore Respondent Assessee by : Shri Edmond D’Souza, CA Respondent by : Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT-DR-I Date of hearing : 25-08-2015 Date of pronouncement : 31-08-2015 O R D E R PER SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JM: These two appeals are filed…

M/S Assisi Education Trust, Mangalore vs. CIT, Mangalore

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

ITA 730/BANG/2014[N.A.]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jul 2015

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri V.K.Gurunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Farhat Hussain Qureshi, CIT

Section 11Section 12(1)Section 12ASection 1A

…IT Act, so far these are for the purpose of achieving the main object of the assessee trust. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Addl.CIT Vs Surat Art Silk cloth manufacturers Association 121 ITR 1(SC) as well as in case of Dharmadeepti Vs CIT 114 ITR 454. Thus, the learned AR has pleaded the impugned order passed by the CIT is not sustainable under law and the assessee is entitle and eligible for grant of registration u/s 12AA of the IT Act, 1961. 5. On the other hand, learned DR has submitted that the CIT specifically issued the show caus…

M Madhusudan, L/R of Late Manohar N S, Bangalore vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore V, Bangalore

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

ITA 1243/BANG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jul 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri V.K.Gurunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Farhat Hussain Qureshi, CIT

Section 11Section 12(1)Section 12ASection 1A

…IT Act, so far these are for the purpose of achieving the main object of the assessee trust. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Addl.CIT Vs Surat Art Silk cloth manufacturers Association 121 ITR 1(SC) as well as in case of Dharmadeepti Vs CIT 114 ITR 454. Thus, the learned AR has pleaded the impugned order passed by the CIT is not sustainable under law and the assessee is entitle and eligible for grant of registration u/s 12AA of the IT Act, 1961. 5. On the other hand, learned DR has submitted that the CIT specifically issued the show caus…

M/S Queen'S Educational Society vs. Commr.of Income Tax

C.A. No.-005167-005167 - 2008Supreme Court16 Mar 2015

Bench: The Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital, May Be Gleaned From The Facts Of One Of Them, Namely, The Queen’S Educational Society Case. The Appellant Filed Its Return For Assessment Years 2000-2001 & 2001-2002 Showing A Net Surplus Of Rs.6,58,862/- & Rs.7,82,632/- Respectively. Since The Appellant Was Established With The Sole 2

Section 10Section 10(22)Section 260A

…he purchase of assets for education, yet such institution cannot be said to be existing solely for educational purposes. It would then become an institution which would really be for profit. 8. In CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers' Assn., (1980) 121 ITR 1, this Court while construing the definition of “charitable purpose” in Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act held: “17. The next question that arises is as to what is the meaning of the expression “activity for profit”. Every trust or institution must have a purpose for which it is established and every purpose must for its accomplishment invol…

M/S Queen'S Educational Society vs. Commr.of Income Tax

C.A. No.-005167-005167 - 2008Supreme Court16 Mar 2015

Bench: The Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital, May Be Gleaned From The Facts Of One Of Them, Namely, The Queen’S Educational Society Case. The Appellant Filed Its Return For Assessment Years 2000-2001 & 2001-2002 Showing A Net Surplus Of Rs.6,58,862/- & Rs.7,82,632/- Respectively. Since The Appellant Was Established With The Sole 2

Section 10Section 10(22)Section 260A

…he purchase of assets for education, yet such institution cannot be said to be existing solely for educational purposes. It would then become an institution which would really be for profit. 8. In CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers' Assn., (1980) 121 ITR 1, this Court while construing the definition of “charitable purpose” in Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act held: “17. The next question that arises is as to what is the meaning of the expression “activity for profit”. Every trust or institution must have a purpose for which it is established and every purpose must for its accomplishment invol…