Chelmsford Club v. CIT

243 ITR 89Supreme Court of India2000#1113 most cited

What is Chelmsford Club v. CIT authority for?

Income arising from mutual activities carried out by clubs or associations solely among their members is not assessable for income tax, as it does not constitute income from a trade or business due to the principle of mutuality.

100

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Chelmsford Club v. CIT · 243 ITR 89 · doctrine of mutuality · mutuality principle · clubs and associations income · non-taxable income · Section 11 · Section 263 · Section 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 143(2)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 263Section 57(iii)Section 11Section 12
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

doctrine of mutualitysection 59(2)mutuality principlesection 2(n)section 10(20)section 38section 59lack of enquirysection 80p(2)(a)national faceless assessment centremalabar industrialsection 57

Judgments citing Chelmsford Club v. CIT

The Mullanpur Garibdas Co-Op Multipurpose Society, Mohali vs. DCIT, C-6(1), Mohali

ITA 645/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Singh, CIT, DR
Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…s of its members, is also exempt from tax. Your kind attention is invited to the case of 'Bankipur Club Limited', 140 CTR 102 (SC) and 'Canara Bank Golden Jubilee Staff Welfare Fund Versus DCIT', 308 ITR 202 (Kerala) and 'Chemsford Club Limited', reported as 243 ITR 89." By way of Question Number 5, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee society to give complete details of all bank accounts, including FD ITA 515/CHD/2017 ITA 569/CHD/2018 & ITA 645/CHD/2019 16 accounts, maintained by the society, giving the name of the bank and branch with completed address, account number and type of account, that is, whe…

The Mullanpur Garibdas Co-Op Multipurpose Society, Mullanpur vs. Pr. CIT-II, Chandigarh

ITA 569/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Singh, CIT, DR
Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…s of its members, is also exempt from tax. Your kind attention is invited to the case of 'Bankipur Club Limited', 140 CTR 102 (SC) and 'Canara Bank Golden Jubilee Staff Welfare Fund Versus DCIT', 308 ITR 202 (Kerala) and 'Chemsford Club Limited', reported as 243 ITR 89." By way of Question Number 5, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee society to give complete details of all bank accounts, including FD ITA 515/CHD/2017 ITA 569/CHD/2018 & ITA 645/CHD/2019 16 accounts, maintained by the society, giving the name of the bank and branch with completed address, account number and type of account, that is, whe…

The Mullanpur Garibdas Co-Op Multipurpose Society, Mohali vs. Pr. CIT-II, Chandigarh

ITA 515/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Singh, CIT, DR
Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…s of its members, is also exempt from tax. Your kind attention is invited to the case of 'Bankipur Club Limited', 140 CTR 102 (SC) and 'Canara Bank Golden Jubilee Staff Welfare Fund Versus DCIT', 308 ITR 202 (Kerala) and 'Chemsford Club Limited', reported as 243 ITR 89." By way of Question Number 5, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee society to give complete details of all bank accounts, including FD ITA 515/CHD/2017 ITA 569/CHD/2018 & ITA 645/CHD/2019 16 accounts, maintained by the society, giving the name of the bank and branch with completed address, account number and type of account, that is, whe…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central Kolkata 2 vs. Deep Holding Pvt Ltd

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITAT/96/2024HC Calcutta01 May 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

Section 144Section 260ASection 263Section 263(1)

…der under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax? 2 (ii) Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial error of law by not considering that in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. – Vs – CIT(243 ITR 89), the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that if the Assessing Officer passes an order without application of mind resulting in loss of tax, if becomes prejudicial to the interest of revenue, justifying exercise of jurisdiction under Section 263(1) of the Income Tax Act by the Commissioner?” We have heard Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, l…

Kanak Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Bilagi vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bagalkot

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 790/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridhar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanaian, S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 18Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…8 of co-op. societies in the present case and held that society dealing with nominal/associate members is not eligible for deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i). The AO relied on the judgment of CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd., 226 ITR 97 (SC) and Chelmsford Club v. CIT and 243 ITR 89 (SC). Citizen Co-op. Credit Society Ltd., Civil Appeal No.10245 of 2017 (SLP(C) No.20044 of 2015 dated 8.8.2017) [SC]. The assessee’s reliance in the case of Mavilayi Service Cooperative Bank (Civil Appeal No.7343-7350 of 2019)[SC] was held to be not applicable to assessee’s case on different facts, since in the present case u/s. 18 of The Karnata…

ITO(TDS), Ajmer vs. Divisionl Forest Officer, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 360/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 80P

…e and development of the club, the notional income from house property in respect of the club building is not assessable to tax, on the principle of mutuality which will extend to such deemed income also on the facts of the case – Chelmsford Club V. CIT(2000) 243 ITR 89(SC).” “Activities should not be commercial or profit – motivated – Where the facilities extended by the clubs to their members are as a part of usual privileges, advantages and conveniences attached to the members of the club, the said activity cannot be said to be trading activity. On the other hand, if the activities disclose profit – earning mo…

Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer vs. Divisionl Forest Officer, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 359/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 80P

…e and development of the club, the notional income from house property in respect of the club building is not assessable to tax, on the principle of mutuality which will extend to such deemed income also on the facts of the case – Chelmsford Club V. CIT(2000) 243 ITR 89(SC).” “Activities should not be commercial or profit – motivated – Where the facilities extended by the clubs to their members are as a part of usual privileges, advantages and conveniences attached to the members of the club, the said activity cannot be said to be trading activity. On the other hand, if the activities disclose profit – earning mo…

Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer vs. Divisionl Forest Officer, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 358/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 10(46)Section 11Section 133Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)Section 80P

…e and development of the club, the notional income from house property in respect of the club building is not assessable to tax, on the principle of mutuality which will extend to such deemed income also on the facts of the case – Chelmsford Club V. CIT(2000) 243 ITR 89(SC).” “Activities should not be commercial or profit – motivated – Where the facilities extended by the clubs to their members are as a part of usual privileges, advantages and conveniences attached to the members of the club, the said activity cannot be said to be trading activity. On the other hand, if the activities disclose profit – earning mo…

ITO, Ward - 2(1), Mangaluru vs. M/S S. K & Udupi District Co-Operative Fish Marketing Federation Limited, Mangaluru

ITA 43/PAN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.38 To 43/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 To 2014-15 & 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…aming the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in ‘PCIT Vs Totagars Co-Op. Sale Society’ found reporte…

ITO, Ward - 2(1), Mangaluru vs. M/S S. K & Udupi District Co-Operative Fish Marketing Federation Limited, Mangaluru

ITA 42/PAN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.38 To 43/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 To 2014-15 & 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…aming the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in ‘PCIT Vs Totagars Co-Op. Sale Society’ found reporte…

ITO, Ward - 2(1), Mangaluru vs. M/S S. K & Udupi District Co-Operative Fish Marketing Federation Limited, Mangaluru

ITA 41/PAN/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.38 To 43/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 To 2014-15 & 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…aming the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in ‘PCIT Vs Totagars Co-Op. Sale Society’ found reporte…

ITO, Ward - 2(1), Mangaluru vs. M/S S. K & Udupi District Co-Operative Fish Marketing Federation Limited, Mangaluru

ITA 40/PAN/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.38 To 43/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 To 2014-15 & 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…aming the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in ‘PCIT Vs Totagars Co-Op. Sale Society’ found reporte…

ITO, Ward - 2(1), Mangaluru vs. M/S S. K & Udupi District Co-Operative Fish Marketing Federation Limited, Mangaluru

ITA 39/PAN/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.38 To 43/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 To 2014-15 & 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…aming the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in ‘PCIT Vs Totagars Co-Op. Sale Society’ found reporte…

ITO, Ward - 2(1), Mangaluru vs. M/S S. K & Udupi District Co-Operative Fish Marketing Federation Limited, Mangaluru

ITA 38/PAN/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.38 To 43/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 To 2014-15 & 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. Shrikanth
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…aming the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in ‘PCIT Vs Totagars Co-Op. Sale Society’ found reporte…

Sprint Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT- 3 Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 1411/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 68

…edings initiated under section 263 of the Act was considered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. V CIT (321 ITR 92) by taking into account the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co Ltd (243 ITR 80). The relevant observations made by Hon’ble Bombay High Court are extracted below: “Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if he considers that any order passed therein, by the Assessing Officer is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the int…

Ramanbhai Bholidas Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 84/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Dec 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Ms. Nupur Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT/D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54B

…n the statement of account filed by the assessee showing certain income as agricultural income, without making any enquiry, the exercise of jurisdiction by the Commissioner u/s 263(1) would be justified- Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs CIT [2000] 109 Taxman 66/243 ITR 89 (SC). I.T.A No. 84/Ahd/2021 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No 7 Ramanbhai Bholidas Patel vs. PCIT ii) Not holding an enquiry as is normal and not applying mind to the relevant material would certainly be 'erroneous' assessment warranting exercise of revisional jurisdiction. CIT v. Jawahar Bhattacharjee (2012) 20 taxmann.com 652/342 ITR 74/249 CTR 529 (Gau.)…

Dheeraj Babulal Shah, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT -17, Mumbai

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

ITA 886/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledheeraj Babulal Shah V. Pr.Cit – Mumbai – 17 C/O. D.C. Bothra & Co.Llp (Ca) Room No. 120, 1St Floor {Formerly Known As D.C. Bothra & Co.} Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43 297, Tardeo Road, Wille Mansion G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra(E), Mumbai - 400051 1St Floor, Opp. Bank Of India Nana Chowk, Mumbai - 400007 Pan: Arwps1458D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Rajkumar Singh Department Represented By : Shri S.H. Usmani

Section 1Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…e to various case law he discussed in detail the impact of the bogus entry and colorable devises in the penny stock transactions in his order. Accordingly, by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT [243 ITR 89] and decisions of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahalakshmi Liquor Promotors (P) Ltd. CIT [2013] 29 taxmann.com 70 and M/s. Subhalakshmi Vinijya Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT in ITA.No. 1104/KOL/2014, he came to the conclusion that Assessing Officer failed to make the relevant investigations on these scrips and he brought on record that A…

Jogeshbhai Ramanlal Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 115/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Jogeshbhai Ramanlal Patel The Pcit-3, C.A. Ashokkumar S. Gupta, C-411, Pratykash Kar 203/1, New Cloth Market, O/S. Bhavan, Ambawadi, Vs Raipur Gate, Raipur, Gujarat-380009 Ahmedagad-380002 [Pan No. : Aaxpp3232E] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. Respondent By : Shri A. P. Singh, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing: 06.09.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02.12.2022

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 50C

…iries or verification which should have made; (b) The order is passed allowing any relief without inquiring into the claim; ……” Thus, the Ld. PCIT relying upon the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 109 taxman 66/243 ITR 89 (SC) where the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that both the twin conditions namely order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue, should be satisfied to the exercise powers A.Y. 2017-18 6 under the provisions of Section 263 of the Act and an incorrect assumption of fact or an incorrect application of law by the Assessing Officer wil…

Sh. Gurdeep Singh, Sirmour vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh-1

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 453/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Disposed Off.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…explained from the books of account and sale of stock etc. and again it has no applicability to the facts of the present case. 3.25 In para 12 the ld. PCIT has placed reliance upon the decision of Apex Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co.Ltd. Vs CIT 243 ITR 89 (S.C). It was submitted that the Department is relying upon the proposition that AO has accepted entries in the statement of accounts without making any enquiry. The assessee on the other hand is also heavily relying upon the said decision for the proposition that the twin conditions are required to be met and after AO took one of the possible…

Deputy Commissoner of Income Tax, Circle -7, Pune vs. Shruti Arihant Patni, Pune

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 423/PUN/2020[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 64

…vacant during the whole year under consideration was assessable to income-tax under the head ‘income from house property’. This 6 finding of the ld. CIT(A) is inconsonance with the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chelmsford Club vs. CIT, 243 ITR 89 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that :- “A conjoint reading of sections 2(24), 14, 22 and 23 also makes it abundantly clear that what is being taxed under section 22 is the 'deemed income' of an assessee from the property owned by him”. ........ “What was charged under section 22 was the annual value of the ownership of the property ir…