Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. ITO

52 ITR 524Supreme Court of India1964#1636 most cited

What is Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. ITO authority for?

A state road transport corporation, though state-owned, is a separate legal entity from the State. Its income is distinct from the income of the State and is not exempt from income tax under Article 289 of the Constitution of India.

69

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. ITO · 52 ITR 524 · Supreme Court · state corporation income · separate legal entity · income of the State · Article 289 · tax exemption for State undertakings · Section 10(20) · Section 10(46) · statutory corporation income tax

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 10(46)Section 12Section 143(3)Section 289Section 40A(3)Section 10(20)Section 10(46A)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 10(20a)public servantsection 10(20)section 10(46)self occupied propertysection 24asection 80lsection 74section 39section 38section 73section 10(2)

Judgments citing Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. ITO

Centre for E-Governance, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Exemption, Circle-1, Bangalore

ITA 936/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri S Parthasarthi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)

…to the following two judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to hold that the Appellant is not “State” and consequently that Article 289 of the COI has no application: 1. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. ITO, B-I, B-Ward, Hyderabad & Another (52 ITR 524, SC) 2. Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority v. Union of India & Others (283 ITR 97, SC) The learned CIT(A) has extracted the relevant portions of APSRTC at para 6.1.1 of his order (Pages 16–22) and followed Adityapur to conclude that the Appellant cannot be treated as “State” under Article 289. Distinction Between APSRTC / Adityapur an…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. State Pollution Control Board Odisha, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 521/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT
Section 10(23)(iv)Section 12ASection 270A

…llution Control Board (supra) clearly shows that in the said case in para 17, the Co-ordinate Bench has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Adityapur Industrial as also the case of A.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs ITO, 52 ITR 524 (SC). The Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench followed the decision in the case of A.P.Housing Board, whose facts are entirely different insofar as the assets and liabilities of the said Housing Board belong to the Board and was disposable at the discretion of the Housing Board. The rates and fees were fixed by the State Board. In t…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. State Pollution Control Board Odisha, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 520/CTK/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT
Section 10(23)(iv)Section 12ASection 270A

…llution Control Board (supra) clearly shows that in the said case in para 17, the Co-ordinate Bench has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Adityapur Industrial as also the case of A.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs ITO, 52 ITR 524 (SC). The Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench followed the decision in the case of A.P.Housing Board, whose facts are entirely different insofar as the assets and liabilities of the said Housing Board belong to the Board and was disposable at the discretion of the Housing Board. The rates and fees were fixed by the State Board. In t…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. State Pollution Control Board Odisha, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee and cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 518/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld CIT
Section 10(23)(iv)Section 12ASection 270A

…llution Control Board (supra) clearly shows that in the said case in para 17, the Co-ordinate Bench has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Adityapur Industrial as also the case of A.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs ITO, 52 ITR 524 (SC). The Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench followed the decision in the case of A.P.Housing Board, whose facts are entirely different insofar as the assets and liabilities of the said Housing Board belong to the Board and was disposable at the discretion of the Housing Board. The rates and fees were fixed by the State Board. In t…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. State Pollution Control Board Odisha, Bhubaneswar

ITA 517/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
Section 10(23)(iv)Section 12ASection 270A

…llution Control Board (supra) clearly shows that in the said case in para 17, the Co-ordinate Bench has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Adityapur Industrial as also the case of A.P. State Road Transport Corporation vs ITO, 52 ITR 524 (SC). The Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench followed the decision in the case of A.P.Housing Board, whose facts are entirely different insofar as the assets and liabilities of the said Housing Board belong to the Board and was disposable at the discretion of the Housing Board. The rates and fees were fixed by the State Board. In t…

Commissioner of Income Tax Chandigarh vs. M/S Improvement Trust Bathinda

The appeals are hereby dismissed

ITA/161/2016HC Punjab & Haryana17 Nov 2025

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 260A

…t [HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH] ITA No. 161 of 2016 (O&M) & connected cases. -7- assessee-Trust for exemption. Reliance in this regard was placed upon the decisions of Supreme Court in the case of A.P. State Transport Corporation vs. Income Tax Officer (1964) 52 ITR 524, Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority vs. Union of India 2006(283) ITR 97 and Calcutta State Transport Corporation vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 1996(219) ITR 515. 16. The next contention of learned counsel for the Revenue was that the Tribunal had not followed its earlier decision in the case of Jammu Development Authority vs. Comm…

Unit Improvement Trust, Bharatpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Jaipur

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

ITA 950/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Tarun Agarwal, CA, ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Ojha, CIT, ld. DR
Section 10(20)Section 11(2)Section 250Section 3

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed clause…

Unit Improvement Trust, Bharatpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Jaipur

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

ITA 949/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Tarun Agarwal, CA, ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Ojha, CIT, ld. DR
Section 10(20)Section 11(2)Section 250Section 3

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed clause…

Urban Improvement Trust (Now Kota Development Authority), Kota vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Circle, Jaipur

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 813/JPR/2024[AY 2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the 26 state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed cl…

Urban Improvement Trust (Now Kota Development Authority), Kota vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Circle, Jaipur

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 812/JPR/2024[AY 2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the 26 state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed cla…

Urban Improvement Trust (Now Kota Development Authority), Kota vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Circle, Jaipur

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 811/JPR/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed clause…

Urban Improvement Trust, Kota vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Circle, Jaipur

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 803/JPR/2024[AY 2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the 26 state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed cla…

DCIT, Exemptions, Circle, Jaipur vs. Urban Improvement Trust, Kota

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 797/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the 26 state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed cla…

DCIT, Exemptions, Circle, Jaipur vs. Urban Improvement Trust, Kota

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 796/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the 26 state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed cla…

DCIT, Exemptions, Circle, Jaipur vs. Urban Improvement Trust, Kota

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 795/JPR/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the 26 state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed cla…

DCIT, Exemptions, Circle, Jaipur vs. Urban Improvement Trust, Kota

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 794/JPR/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Respondent: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed clause…

Urban Improvement Trust, Kota vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Circle, Jaipur

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 774/JPR/2024[AY 2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the 26 state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed cla…

Urban Improvement Trust, Kota vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Circle, Jaipur

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 773/JPR/2024[AY 2003-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the 26 state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed cla…

Urban Improvement Trust, Kota vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Circle, Jaipur

In the result, the assessee's income is found to be not chargeable

ITA 731/JPR/2024[AY 2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the 26 state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed cla…

ACIT, Exemptions, Circle, Jaipur vs. Urban Improvement Trust, Kota

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

ITA 717/JPR/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT, Ld. DR
Section 250

…s, as the Tribunal is a final fact finding authority and its Endeavour is to settle the issue in its true spirit w.r.t. Law and facts both: a) The contention of the assessee is not acceptable in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (52 ITR 524) wherein it has been clearly bifurcated that the income of the state is different and income of the corporation is different. The relevant portion is reproduced as under "Reading the three clauses together, one consideration emerges beyond all doubt and that is that the property as well as the income in respect of which exemption is claimed clause…

Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. ITO (52 ITR 524) — Cited in 69 Judgments | BharatTax