Asstt. CIT v. Thanthi Trust

247 ITR 785Supreme Court of India2001#1150 most cited

What is Asstt. CIT v. Thanthi Trust authority for?

A charitable trust can earn income from business activities under Section 11(4A), including incidental businesses, and still claim exemption under Section 11, provided the income is applied towards its charitable objects. Generating a surplus from such activities does not automatically negate the charitable purpose.

98

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,359 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Thanthi Trust · Asstt. CIT v. Thanthi Trust · Section 11 · Section 11(4A) · Section 2(15) · charitable trust business income · incidental business exemption · application of income · charitable purpose · surplus generation

Also reported as

115 Taxmann 126

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 11(4A)Section 147Section 148Section 10(23C)Section 11(1)(a)

Issues it is cited on

section 4(3)section 11(4)section 35acsection 10(22)section 11(4a)section 205advancement of general public utilitysection 60section 115bbcsection 35asection 2(45)section 36(1)(v)

Judgments citing Asstt. CIT v. Thanthi Trust

ITO(Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. Adhikar, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 265/CTK/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 11Section 2(15)

…should be complied with; firstly, the rate should be comparable with the market and secondly, it should not be such that it generates profit at the cost of the beneficiaries. "'] The appellant has cited the Supreme Court ruling in CIT v. Thanthi Trust [2001J 247 ITR 785. In this case the Hon'ble Apex Court held that income from incidental business was permissible if the amount was applied for charitable purposes. The appellant has totally misunderstood the ruling and nowhere it suggests that the primary charitable activity can be run for profit on commercial principles. The ruling was specifically confined to su…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Mettam Penchala Naidu

ITTA/59/2010HC Telangana18 Sept 2018

Bench: This Court That The 1St Assessment Order Of The Ito Was Passed On 28.03.1988, Which Was Challenged Before The Leaned Cit (A) & The Same Was Dismissed On 28.11.1988. Against The Said Order, The Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Itat, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack, Which Was Dismissed On 19.01.1990. Thereafter, By Order Dated 13.12.1990 Passed In A Misc. Application, The Order Dated 19.01.1990 Was Recalled & The Matter Was Heard Afresh. Again On 10.05.1991, Learned Tribunal Decided The Matter & Allowed The Exemption To The Assessee. The Revenue Filed Writ Petition Before This Court Challenging The Rectification Order Dated 13.12.1990. This Court On 02.12.1991 Allowed The Writ Petition & Quashed The Recalling Order Dated 13.12.1990 As Well As Its Substantive Order Dated

Section 254(2)

…1.1990 by the Tribunal in which the method of accounting adopted by the assessee was not accepted and the exemption u/s.11 was denied. He also placed reliance on the following decisions: Samajbadi Society-vs-ACIT 79 ITD 112, ACIT-Vs-Thanthi Trust 247 ITR 785 and Sole Trustee, Loka Sikshana Trust-Vs-CIT 101 ITR 234. 3. Paragraph-5 “Ground Nos.2 and 3 relate to applicability of Section 11(4A) to the facts of assessee’s case. The assessee is aggrieved by applying the provisions of section 11(4A) of the Act to the facts of this case by the lower authorities. We find no merit in these grounds…

M/S Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Association, Chandigarh vs. ITO (Exemptions), Chandigarh

ITA 1382/CHANDI/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2013-14 Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Vs. The Ito (Exemptions), Association, Ward, Chandigarh Sector 10, Chandigarh Pan No. Aaatc4943J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Y.K. Sud, Ca Respondent By : Smt. Chanderkanta, Addl. Cit (On 22.3.2018) & Sh.Yoginder Mittal, Sr. Dr (On 13.7.2018) Date Of Hearing : 22.03.2018 & 13.7.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2018

For Appellant: Sh. Y.K. Sud, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Chanderkanta, Addl. CIT (on 22.3.2018)
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 2(15)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2013-14 Chandigarh Lawn Tennis Vs. The ITO (Exemptions), Association, Ward, Chandigarh Sector 10, Chandigarh PAN No. AAATC4943J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Y.K. Sud, CA Respondent by : Smt. Chanderkanta, Addl. CIT (on 22.3.2018) & Sh.Yoginder Mittal, Sr. DR (on 13.7.2018) Date of Hearing : 22.03.2018 & 13.7.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 26.07.2018 ORDER Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred b…

The Fine Arts Society, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 2(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 189/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2171/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…ucation'. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the Assessing Officer's stand in not following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in re. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Thanthi Trust (247 ITR 785) for the purpose of understanding the definition of the term incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the Trust or the institution". 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the Assessing Officer's stand in not giving the benefit of Section 11(4A) of the Act and further that the prov…

The Fine Arts Society, Mumbai vs. Dy Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) - 1(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2171/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2171/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR
Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…ucation'. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the Assessing Officer's stand in not following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in re. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Thanthi Trust (247 ITR 785) for the purpose of understanding the definition of the term incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the Trust or the institution". 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the Assessing Officer's stand in not giving the benefit of Section 11(4A) of the Act and further that the prov…

Probodhan Prakashah, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) II(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1531/MUM/2016[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Ramit Kochar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Anil SatheFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen
Section 11Section 271(1)(c)

…same. The learned CIT(A) observed that the issue of claim of exemption in the case of the assessee has been a debatable one, as far as its appellate history goes. Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs Thanthi Trust (2001) 247 ITR 785 (SC), the CIT(A) has stated that the claim of the assessee is debatable. He also noted that as far as the facts and figures of income and expenditure statements are concerned, there is not dispute that the assessee had not concealed any such facts and figures. But the assessee had presumed that in its opinion, it had made a bonafide claim of exem…

Probodhan Prakashah, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) II(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1529/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Ramit Kochar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Anil SatheFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen
Section 11Section 271(1)(c)

…same. The learned CIT(A) observed that the issue of claim of exemption in the case of the assessee has been a debatable one, as far as its appellate history goes. Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs Thanthi Trust (2001) 247 ITR 785 (SC), the CIT(A) has stated that the claim of the assessee is debatable. He also noted that as far as the facts and figures of income and expenditure statements are concerned, there is not dispute that the assessee had not concealed any such facts and figures. But the assessee had presumed that in its opinion, it had made a bonafide claim of exem…

Director of Income Tax (Exempt vs. The Delhi Public School Society

ITA/1086/2005HC Delhi03 Apr 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 1Section 10Section 260A

…C)(vi) of the Act. It is urged that considering that the receipts from such activity were ploughed back for pursuing the objects of the Assessee. This entitled it to claim the exemption. The decision of the Supreme Court, reported as ACIT v. Thanthi Trust 247 ITR 785 was cited in this regard. There it was held that: “The substituted sub-section (4A) states that the income derived from a business held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes shall not be included in the total income of the previous year of the trust or institution if "the business is incidental to the attainment of the obj…

M/S Atria Power Corproation Ltd., Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

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

ITA 1394/BANG/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K. Garodiaassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.L. Sowmya Achar, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 211Section 234Section 80I

…en to the assessee and the interpretation beneficial to the taxpayer should be accepted. Reference was made to the following cases: - CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.: [TS-6-SC-1973-O] - CIT vs. J.K.Hosiery Factory : [TS-5013-SC-1986-O] - ACIT v. Thanthi Trust: 247 ITR 785 [TS-5005-SC-2001-O] Page 21 of 48 - UOI v. Onkar Kanwar : [TS-5021-SC-2002-O] - CIT v. A. J. Abraham Anthraper : [TS-5230-HC-2004(Kerala)-O] - Vijay Omprakash Bansal v. CIT : [TS-6051-HC-2001(Bombay)-O] - CIT v. L.G Balakrishnan: [TS-5374-HC-2001(Madras)-O] - CIT v. Quantas Airlines Ltd.: [TS-5297-HC-2002(Delhi)-O] - Southern Roadways Ltd. vs. C…

ITO (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Matoshri Arts & Sports Trust, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 333/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhincome Tax Officer-(E)2(1) Matoshri Arts & Sports Trust Room No. 512, Piramal Meenatai Thakeracy Ground Vs. Chambers, Lal Baug Jogeshwri Vikhroli Link Road Parel, Mumbai 400012 Andhri (E), Mumbai 400093 Pan – Aaatm2559G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Suman KumarFor Respondent: None
Section 11Section 12ASection 253Section 80G

…e Assessing Officer relied upon the decision in the case of Sind Cooperative Housing Society vs ITO. The stand of the assessee is that while deciding the issue, the ld. Assessing Officer completely ignored the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in Thanthi Trust 247 ITR 785. 2.3. If the observation made in the assessment order, leading to addition made to the total income, conclusion drawn in the impugned order, material available on record, assertions made by the ld. respective counsel, if kept in juxtaposition and analyzed, there is no dispute to the fact that sports activities are carried out by the assessee and…

Sreema Mahila Samity, Nadia vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-Nadia, Nadia

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2826/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2017AY 2009-2010
For Appellant: S/Shri K.M. Roy &For Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 2

…he trust, it would be considered as charitable activities of the samity notwithstanding the profit and gain involved therein. In this respect, a reference may be made to the decision of Hen' ble Supreme Court in the case of Asstt. CIT Vs. Thanthi Trust (2001) 247 ITR 785 (sq. Thus, mere because there was a surplus from the activity of micro financing, that by itself, cannot be a ground to say that the assessee does not exist for charitable purpose particularly when under Memorandum of Association and 3 Articles of Association, it has been clearly provided that the profit shall not be distributed amongst the membe…

Snr Sons Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3127/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.Saroj Kumar Parida,AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Vijayaprabha,JCIT, DR
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 2Section 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 "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.3127/Mds./2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2013-14) M/s.SNR Sons Charitable Trust, The DCIT(Exemptions), Vs. 395,Sarojini Naidu Road, Race Course Road, Sihdapudur, Coimbatore. Coimbatore 641 044. PAN AABTS 1080 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.Saroj Kumar Parida,Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respond…

M/S. Lakshmi Ammal Memorial Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Tiruppur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2852/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Mr.V.Sreenivasan, JICIT, D.RFor Respondent: 20.06.2017
Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 2Section 2(15)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, C/‘SMC’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C/“SMC” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी. चं" पूजार" लेखा सद"य , के सम" । BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.2852/Mds./2016 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/s.Lakshmi Ammal Memorial Trust, Income Tax officer, Vs. 47,Nehru Street, Ward I(6), Tiruppur 641 601. Tiruppur. PAN AAATL 1344 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Mr.V.Jagadisan, C.A अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Mr.V.Sreenivasan, JICIT, D.R ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : 20.06.2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of hearing : 05.07.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronounce…

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/807/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

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

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

…ction 2 (15) read with Sections 11 and 12 of the Act. The CIT (A) referred to the decisions in ACIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association (1980) 2 SCC 31, Aditanar Education Institution v. ACIT (1997) 3 SCC 346 and ACIT v. Thanthi Trust (2001) 247 ITR 785 (SC). 12. For the subsequent AYs, the AO continued to deny the exemption by the assessment orders dated 26th November 2010, 15th December 2011 and 31st December 2008 for the AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2006-07. The CIT (A) by the corresponding orders dated 30th June 2011, 18th October 2012 and 22nd February 2010 allowed the Assessee's appeals a…

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/812/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

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

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

…ction 2 (15) read with Sections 11 and 12 of the Act. The CIT (A) referred to the decisions in ACIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association (1980) 2 SCC 31, Aditanar Education Institution v. ACIT (1997) 3 SCC 346 and ACIT v. Thanthi Trust (2001) 247 ITR 785 (SC). 12. For the subsequent AYs, the AO continued to deny the exemption by the assessment orders dated 26th November 2010, 15th December 2011 and 31st December 2008 for the AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2006-07. The CIT (A) by the corresponding orders dated 30th June 2011, 18th October 2012 and 22nd February 2010 allowed the Assessee's appeals a…

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/811/2015HC Delhi03 May 2017

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

Section 12ASection 2Section 260

…ction 2 (15) read with Sections 11 and 12 of the Act. The CIT (A) referred to the decisions in ACIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association (1980) 2 SCC 31, Aditanar Education Institution v. ACIT (1997) 3 SCC 346 and ACIT v. Thanthi Trust (2001) 247 ITR 785 (SC). 12. For the subsequent AYs, the AO continued to deny the exemption by the assessment orders dated 26th November 2010, 15th December 2011 and 31st December 2008 for the AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2006-07. The CIT (A) by the corresponding orders dated 30th June 2011, 18th October 2012 and 22nd February 2010 allowed the Assessee's appeals a…

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

…ction 2 (15) read with Sections 11 and 12 of the Act. The CIT (A) referred to the decisions in ACIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association (1980) 2 SCC 31, Aditanar Education Institution v. ACIT (1997) 3 SCC 346 and ACIT v. Thanthi Trust (2001) 247 ITR 785 (SC). 12. For the subsequent AYs, the AO continued to deny the exemption by the assessment orders dated 26th November 2010, 15th December 2011 and 31st December 2008 for the AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2006-07. The CIT (A) by the corresponding orders dated 30th June 2011, 18th October 2012 and 22nd February 2010 allowed the Assessee's appeals a…

Vaigarai Public Charitable and Educational Trust, Dindigul vs. ITO, Dindigul

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 397/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 2(15)

…ion 2(15) of the Act. Its perimeter has been defined by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust vs. CIT 101 ITR 234 to be something akin to normal schooling. No doubt, Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT vs. Thanthi 9. Trust 247 ITR 785 did hold that a business which do not directly accomplish wholly or in part the charitable objects of the trust but only feeds such activities could not be held as a business carried on in the course of actual accomplishment of the objects of the trusts. :- 11 -: However, the assessee here was engaged in printing, publishing and selling books a…

ITO (E) 2(2), Mumbai vs. Prabhodhan Prakashan, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 3833/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan ()

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Ojha, DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sathe, AR
Section 11Section 12ASection 271(1)(c)

…same. The learned CIT(A) observed that the issue of claim of exemption in the case of the assessee has been a debatable one, as far as its appellate history goes. Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs Thanthi Trust (2001) 247 ITR 785 (SC), the CIT(A) has stated that the claim of the assessee is debatable. He also noted that as far as the facts and figures of income and expenditure statements are concerned, there is not dispute that the assessee had not concealed any such facts and figures. But the assessee had presumed that in its opinion, it had made a bonafide claim of exem…

ITO (E) 2(2), Mumbai vs. Pabodhan Prakashan, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 3831/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan ()

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Ojha, DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sathe, AR
Section 11Section 12ASection 271(1)(c)

…same. The learned CIT(A) observed that the issue of claim of exemption in the case of the assessee has been a debatable one, as far as its appellate history goes. Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs Thanthi Trust (2001) 247 ITR 785 (SC), the CIT(A) has stated that the claim of the assessee is debatable. He also noted that as far as the facts and figures of income and expenditure statements are concerned, there is not dispute that the assessee had not concealed any such facts and figures. But the assessee had presumed that in its opinion, it had made a bonafide claim of exem…