CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce

55 ITR 722Supreme Court of India1965#583 most cited

What is CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce authority for?

An organization qualifies as having a charitable purpose if its primary object is the advancement of general public utility, even if its members receive incidental benefits. The existence of incidental non-charitable objects does not negate its charitable status.

167

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce · 55 ITR 722 · section 2(15) · section 11 · section 12A · charitable purpose · advancement of general public utility · incidental benefit to members · primary object test · Chamber of Commerce

Sections most often in play

Section 2(15)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 12Section 12ABSection 147
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 4(3)section 10(23c)(iv)advancement of general public utilityproviso to section 2(15)section 73section 11(4a)section 2(15)section 10(23c)section 11(1)(a)section 11(1)registration under section 12asection 12aa

Judgments citing CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce

Hyderabad Battery Association, Hyderabad vs. CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1515/HYD/2016[]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Nov 2019

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessment Year: Na

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 4(3)Section 4(3)(i)

…arned Counsel for the assessee while reiterating the submissions made before the authorities below has placed reliance upon the following case law in support of his contentions: i) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965) 55 ITR 722 (S.C.) ii) CIT vs. Andhra Pradesh Police Welfare Society (1984) 148 ITR 287 iii) CIT vs. Riding Club (1987) 168 ITR 393 iv) Bengal Hosiery Manufacturers Association vs. DIT (E) (2012) 18 ITR 0205 v) DDIT vs. PHD Chamber of Commerce & Industry (2011) 46 SOT 235 vi) PHD Chamber of Commerce & Industry (2013) 357 ITR 296. Page 2 of 5 ITA No 1515 of…

M/S.Sree Narayanan Dharma Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, Thrissur vs. The ITO ( Exemptions), Kochi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 436/COCH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, AM & GEORGE GEORGE K., JM I.T.A. Nos. 435 & 436/Coch/2019 Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sree Narayana Dharma Vs. The Income Tax Officer Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, (Exemption), kochi. Azhikode Post, Kodungallur, Thrissur-680 666. [PAN: AABAS 2078J] (Assessee -Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee by None (Argument Notes filed) Revenue by Shri Shantam Bose, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 24/09/2019 Date of pronouncement 25/09/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These two appeal by the assessee are di…

M/S.Sree Narayanan Dharma Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, Thrissur vs. The ITO ( Exemptions), Kochi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 435/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, AM & GEORGE GEORGE K., JM I.T.A. Nos. 435 & 436/Coch/2019 Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Sree Narayana Dharma Vs. The Income Tax Officer Paripalana Yuvajana Samithy, (Exemption), kochi. Azhikode Post, Kodungallur, Thrissur-680 666. [PAN: AABAS 2078J] (Assessee -Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee by None (Argument Notes filed) Revenue by Shri Shantam Bose, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 24/09/2019 Date of pronouncement 25/09/2019 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: These two appeal by the assessee are di…

B P Marine Academy, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no 6 is allowed in favour of the Assessee

ITA 174/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 13(3)Section 143(1)Section 234Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80G

…oling or training giving to the young in preparation for the walks of life. It also converts the old course of scholastic instruction which a person has received.” Moreover, the Assessee also relied upon the judgment in the case of Andhra Chamber of Commerce [130 ITR 184(SC)] in which the Appeal of the Revenue was dismissed by holding that the objects of the Chamber of Commerce was to promote and protect trade commerce and industries and therefore, falling under the definition of “Charitable” under other objects of public benefit. Similarly, the CIT (A) also relied upon judgment in the case of Queens Education So…

Sri. Sadguru Education Trust, Madikeri vs. ITO

In the result, all the grounds relating to both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 715/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan, Vice Presidnet & Shri B.R Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.V Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 10Section 194CSection 2(15)Section 40

…ing of classes for open university/distance education cannot be construed as charitable activity within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act. The Patna High Court, after considering the judgment of the Apex Court in CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce [1965] 55 ITR 722 (SC) and in the case of CIT v. Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust [1970] 77 ITR 61 (Mys) has observed as follows at page 615 of the ITR: “It is true that by reason of the Finance Act, 1983, the question as to whether any charitable institution is being run with a profit motive or not has lost its relevant. However, the word “charitable” prefixing…

M/S. the Andhra Pradesh Private Medical and Dental Colleges Management Associons, Vijayawada vs. The ITO, Rajahmundry

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/VIZ/2016[]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Apr 2019

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.162/Viz/2016 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: - ) M/S Andhra Pradesh Private Medical Vs. Income Tax Officer & Dental Colleges Management (Exemptions) Association Rajahmundry D.No.52/1/1-5/B Road No.5, Veterinary Colony Vijayawada [Pan :Aaeat2041H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2019

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, DR
Section 12ASection 15Section 2Section 80G

…o.162/Viz/2016 M/s Andhra Pradesh Private Medical and Dental Colleges Management Associaiton, Vijayawada (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gujarat Maritime Board (2007) 295 ITR 561 (SC) (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965) 55 ITR 722 (SC) (iv) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. State Urban Development Agency (SUDA) (2013) 218 Taxman 146 (All) (v) Commissioner of Income Tax Andhra Pradesh-II Vs. Andhra Pradesh Police Welfare Society (1971) 82 ITR 704(SC) (vi) Bangalore Urban & Rural District Co-operative Milk Producers Societies Members and Employees Welfare Trust Vs. DIT (2016) 38…

M/S. M P Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Bhopal), Bhopal vs. The CIT (Exemption), Bhopal

In the result, appeal of the Assessee in ITANo

ITA 217/IND/2015[-]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jan 2019

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & And Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year: M.P. Audyogik Kendra Cit(Exemption) Vikas Nigam, Bhopal Bhopal बनाम/ (Appellant) (Revenue ) Vs. P.A. No.Aaccm6048F Appellant By Shri Praveen N. Surange, Adv. Revenue By Smt. Ashima Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.01.2019

Section 12ASection 25

…is contrary to order passed by Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kandla Port Trust reported in (2014) 364 ITR 164 (Guj), relying on the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in C.I.T. v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce reported in (1965) 55 ITR 722 (SC), (.I.T. v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation reported in (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association's case (1980) 120 ITR 1 (SC) and the Bar council of Maharashtra's case (1981) 130 ITR 28 (SC). K.Because Ld. CIT (E) has avoided himself to consider the most important and core issue raised in the applic…

Calicut Educationtrust, Calicut vs. The ITO, WD-1, Calicut

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

ITA 266/COCH/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.266/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2003-04 Calicut Education Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Corporation College Of Arts & Ward-1(1), Calicut. Science, Emas Complex, Ymca Road, Kozhidoe-673 001. [Pan:Aaatc 4925C] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee By Shri M.V. Venugopal, Ca Revenue By Shri Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/10/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2018 O R D E R

Section 10Section 11Section 12A

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, AM & GEORGE GEORGE K., JM I.T.A. No.266/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2003-04 Calicut Education Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Corporation College of Arts & Ward-1(1), Calicut. Science, EMAS Complex, YMCA Road, Kozhidoe-673 001. [PAN:AAATC 4925C] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee by Shri M.V. Venugopal, CA Revenue by Shri Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 24/10/2018 Date of pronouncement 30/10/2018 O R D E R Per CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed aga…

DCIT (Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. S.M.Charitable Educational Trust, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 432/CTK/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Sri Bibekananda Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…nts who paid extra fees willingly was incidental to primary activity and even the profit motive was not required to be seen in the advancement of ancillary objects as has been held the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965) 55 ITR 722 that only the predominant object for which the organization was created is alone to be considered for the purpose for determining whether the nature of activities fall within the scope and ambit of charity. Moreover, the C.B.D.T has issued Circular No. 21/2016 dated 27.05.2016 wherein the Board has advised not to cancel registration of a charitabl…

DCIT (Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. S.M.Charitable Educational Trust, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 431/CTK/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Sri Bibekananda Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…nts who paid extra fees willingly was incidental to primary activity and even the profit motive was not required to be seen in the advancement of ancillary objects as has been held the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965) 55 ITR 722 that only the predominant object for which the organization was created is alone to be considered for the purpose for determining whether the nature of activities fall within the scope and ambit of charity. Moreover, the C.B.D.T has issued Circular No. 21/2016 dated 27.05.2016 wherein the Board has advised not to cancel registration of a charitabl…

DCIT (Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. S.M.Charitable Educational Trust, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 430/CTK/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Sri Bibekananda Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 13(1)(c)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…nts who paid extra fees willingly was incidental to primary activity and even the profit motive was not required to be seen in the advancement of ancillary objects as has been held the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965) 55 ITR 722 that only the predominant object for which the organization was created is alone to be considered for the purpose for determining whether the nature of activities fall within the scope and ambit of charity. Moreover, the C.B.D.T has issued Circular No. 21/2016 dated 27.05.2016 wherein the Board has advised not to cancel registration of a charitabl…

G D Educational Society, Noida vs. JCIT, Range- 1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3925/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 11Section 12Section 13Section 234

…t is to promote or protect the interest of a particular trade or industry that object becomes an object of public utility, but not so, if it seeks to promote the interest of those who conduct the said trade or industry—CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce [1965] 55 ITR 722 (SC). If the primary or predominant object of an institution is charitable, any other object which might not be charitable but which is ancillary or incidental to the dominant purpose, would not prevent the institution from being a valid charity—Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Mfrs. Association [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC). 15. The present case in our…

G D Educational Society, Noida vs. JCIT, Range- 1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3924/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 11Section 12Section 13Section 234

…t is to promote or protect the interest of a particular trade or industry that object becomes an object of public utility, but not so, if it seeks to promote the interest of those who conduct the said trade or industry—CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce [1965] 55 ITR 722 (SC). If the primary or predominant object of an institution is charitable, any other object which might not be charitable but which is ancillary or incidental to the dominant purpose, would not prevent the institution from being a valid charity—Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Mfrs. Association [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC). 15. The present case in our…

G D Educational Society, Noida vs. JCIT, Range- 1, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3923/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 11Section 12Section 13Section 234

…t is to promote or protect the interest of a particular trade or industry that object becomes an object of public utility, but not so, if it seeks to promote the interest of those who conduct the said trade or industry—CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce [1965] 55 ITR 722 (SC). If the primary or predominant object of an institution is charitable, any other object which might not be charitable but which is ancillary or incidental to the dominant purpose, would not prevent the institution from being a valid charity—Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Mfrs. Association [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC). 15. The present case in our…

ITO (E), New Delhi vs. Consumer Electronics & Appliances Manufactures Association, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 6784/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt Diva Singh

Section 11Section 12ASection 2

…fore the First Appellate Authority relying upon the views taken by his predecessor in 2010 – 11 and 2012 – 13 assessment years considering the objects of the assessee and the decision of the Apex Court in the case of ACIT vs. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1981) 130 ITR 184 the Delhi High Court in the case of PHD Chambers of Commerce and Industry v DIT(E) (2013) 357 ITR 296/212 Taxman 194/(2012) 28 taxmann.com 61. The CIT(A) proceeded to allow relief to the assessee holding as under:- “4.1.5. In view of the discussion above and respectfully following the decision of my Ld. Predecessor for assessment years 2010-11, 2…

Rama Devi Memorial Educational Society, Noida vs. JCIT, Range-2, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 4434/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Ravi Kant Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 11Section 13Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 40

…is to promote or protect the interest of a particular trade or industry that object becomes an object of public utility, but not so, if it seeks to promote the interest of those who conduct the said trade or industry— CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce [1965] 55 ITR 722 (SC). If the primary or predominant object of an institution is charitable, any other object which might not be charitable but which is ancillary or incidental to the dominant purpose, would not prevent the institution from being a valid charity— Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Mfrs. Association [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC). 15. The present case in our…

The Holiness Dr. Syedna Taher, Mumbai vs. Addl DIT (E) II(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5463/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shrisaktijit Dey & Shriramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Firoze B. AndhyarujinaFor Respondent: Shri T.A. Khan& Shri V.Justin
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13(1)(d)

…ble trust. (Trustees of Gordhandas Govindram Family Trust v. CIT). In CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce; Ahmedabad Rana Caste Assn. v. CIT; Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT and Yogiraj Charity Trust v. CIT and CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce,[1965] 55 ITR 722 (SC), it was observed that objects for service and benefit to the general masses would indicate that they are meant for public purpose and thus, would create a public charitable trust. 34. Indubitably, the word „charity‟ connotes altruism in thought and action and involves an idea of benefiting others rather than oneself. (Andhra Chamber of Commer…

The Vijayawada Machinery Merchants Association, Vijayawada vs. The CIT, Vijayawada

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 688/VIZ/2013[]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Apr 2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blethe Vijayawada Machinery Vs. Cit, Vijayawada. Merchants Association, D.No.11-39-11, Katurivari Street, Vijayawada. Pan No. Aabat 8447 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri I. Kama Sastry, Fca. Department By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/04/2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 26/04/2018. O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal, CIT DR
Section 12A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The Vijayawada Machinery vs. CIT, Vijayawada. Merchants Association, D.No.11-39-11, Katurivari Street, Vijayawada. PAN No. AABAT 8447 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri I. Kama Sastry, FCA. Department By : Shri Deba Kumar Sonawal, CIT DR Date of hearing : 23/04/2018. Date of pronouncement : 26/04/2018. O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Ta…

M/S. Orissa Cricket Association, Cuttack vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Cuttack

In the result, ITA No.335/CTK/2017 is allowed and ITA

ITA 210/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm Orissa Cricket Association Vs. Cit(Exemptions), Barabati Stadium,Cuttack-753001, Hyderabad Odisha, Pan No. : Aaaao 0319 F & Orissa Cricket Association Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Barabati Stadium, Cuttack Cuttack-753001, Odisha Pan No. : Aaaao 0319 F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan & D.Das, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Saad Kidwai, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/12/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri N.S.Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan & D.Das, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saad Kidwai, CITDR
Section 120Section 12ASection 254(2)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI, AM & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM Orissa Cricket Association Vs. CIT(Exemptions), Barabati Stadium,Cuttack-753001, Hyderabad Odisha, PAN No. : AAAAO 0319 F AND Orissa Cricket Association Vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), Barabati Stadium, Cuttack Cuttack-753001, Odisha PAN No. : AAAAO 0319 F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्धाऩिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan & D.Das, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Saad Kidwai, CITDR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 12/12/2017 घोषणा…

Jsw Steel Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 4, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4086/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Saikja
Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 80I

…ublic facility is to be fulfilled, it is worth noting that a section of public is also considered to be public. This principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the context of a Chamber of Commerce [CIT vs. Andhra Chamber of Commerce (1965)] (55 ITR 722) wherein it was ruled that even though the Andhra Chamber of Commerce was established only to serve the traders and businessmen in the State of Andhra Pradesh, such traders and businessmen constituted a section of public and therefore the Chamber existed for a public charitable purpose. In the ultimate analysis of the facts in the case of assessee…