CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

159 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1986#1071 most cited

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

An organization qualifies as charitable under Section 2(15) only if its income and property are solely applied for its charitable objects and, upon dissolution, its residual assets are restricted for utilization exclusively for charitable purposes, not for distribution to members or as general state revenue.

102

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation · Section 2(15) · charitable purpose · charitable organization · income application · asset distribution on dissolution · restriction on residual assets · general public utility exemption · Section 11 · Section 13

Sections most often in play

Section 10(20A)Section 11Section 2(15)Section 12ASection 13Section 12Section 12AASection 13(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 4(3)section 10(20a)section 10(23c)(iv)section 205advancement of general public utilitysection 10(20)application of income for charitable purposessection 58section 36(1)(v)section 11(6)section 10(46)section 60

Judgments citing CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Vocational Education Foundation, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Exemption Range, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year

ITA 6051/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, C. A.;&For Respondent: Shri Govind Singhal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 2(15)Section 251Section 251(1)Section 251(2)

…on 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 view is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corpn. [1986] 159 ITR 1 in which it has been held that since the Corporation was established for the purpose of providing efficient transport system, having no profit motive, though it earns income in the process, it is not liable to income-tax. 16. Applying the ratio of the said judgment in the case of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corpn. (supra), we find that, in…

Agra Development Authority, Agra vs. DCIT., Circle-1, Agra

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 216/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2021AY 2011-12
Section 124Section 142Section 153

…s. Andhara Chamber of Commerce (551 ITR 722) CIT vs. Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce & Industry (130 ITR 186) CST vs. Sai Publication Fund (258 ITR 70) ICAI Accounting Research Foundation vs. D.G. (321 ITR 73) CIT vs. A.P. State Road Transport Corp (159 ITR 1) Queens Educational Society vs. CIT (372 ITR 699) Indian Trade Promotion Organization vs D.G.(374 ITR 333) GS1 vs. D.G. (360 ITR 138) Institute of Development of Research Banking Technology Vs. ADI (E) (Page 17-26 of P.B.-1) ITA No.216/Agr/2016, 183/Agr/2014,439/Agr/2015 & ITA No. 177/Agr/2014 27 (5) The non admission of SLP by the honourable Sup…

Srsl Charitable Trust, Udaipur vs. CIT(E), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 58/JODH/2020[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Feb 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalsrsl Charitable Trust, Vs. C.I.T.(E) Srsl House, Pulla Bhuwana Jaipur. Road, National Highway No. 8, Udaipur. Pan No. Aaats 3819 F Assessee By Shri P.C. Parwal (Ca) Revenue By Shri K.C. Badhok, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 01/02/2021 O R D E R Per: Bench This Is The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(E), Jaipur Dated 02/01/2020 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(E) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Cancelling The Registration Granted To The Assessee U/S 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Incorrectly Holding That Activities Carried Out By The Assessee Are Not Genuinely Charitable & Also Not Carried Out In Accordance With The Objects Of The Trust. 1.1 The Ld. Cit(E) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Cancelling The Registration Granted U/S 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 By Making Various Incorrect & Irrelevant Observations Particularly Holding That Rental Income Received From Letting Out The Properties Stated To Be Acquired For The Purpose Of Providing Educational Services To The Students Is An Activity Of Commercial In Nature Hit

Section 12ASection 133ASection 2(15)

…is to carry out a charitable purpose and not to earn profit the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because the some profit arises from the activity. [See CIT vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (1986) 52 CTR (SC) 75: (1986) 2 SCC 391].” It may also be pointed out that this was also an issue for denying the exemption u/s 11 to the assesse trust for AY 2016-17 but the Ld. CIT(A) after detailed discussion and considering the proviso to section 2(15), budget speech of Finance Minister for introducing the proviso, CBDT Circular No.11/2008 dt. 19.12.2008 and decision of Hon’ble Supr…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Railway Vikas Corpn Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the Four appeals filed by the revenue and four cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2877/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri T. Kipgan, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(15)Section 25Section 617

…th Manufacturers Association (1979) 13 CTR (SC) 378 :(1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC)]. 10. The present case in our view is squarely covered by the judgment of Ms Court in the case of CIT vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (1986) 52 CTR (SC) 75 : (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC) in which it has been held that since the Corporation was established for the purpose of providing efficient transport system, having no profit motive, though it earns income in the process, it is not liable to income-tax. 11. Applying the ratio of the said judgment in the case of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (supra), we fin…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Railway Vikas Corpn Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2883/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2021AY 2015-16
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 2(25)

…th Manufacturers Association (1979) 13 CTR (SC) 378 :(1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC)]. 11. The present case in our view is squarely covered by the judgment of Ms Court in the case of CIT vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (1986) 52 CTR (SC) 75 : (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC) in which it has been held that since the Corporation was established for the purpose of providing efficient transport system, having no profit motive, though it earns income in the process, it is not liable to income-tax. 12. Applying the ratio of the said judgment in the case of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (supra), we find…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Railway Vikas Corpn Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2881/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2021AY 2013-14
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 2(25)

…th Manufacturers Association (1979) 13 CTR (SC) 378 :(1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC)]. 11. The present case in our view is squarely covered by the judgment of Ms Court in the case of CIT vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (1986) 52 CTR (SC) 75 : (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC) in which it has been held that since the Corporation was established for the purpose of providing efficient transport system, having no profit motive, though it earns income in the process, it is not liable to income-tax. 12. Applying the ratio of the said judgment in the case of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (supra), we find…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Railway Vikas Corpn Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2880/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2021AY 2012-13
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 2(25)Section 617

…th Manufacturers Association (1979) 13 CTR (SC) 378 :(1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC)]. 11. The present case in our view is squarely covered by the judgment of Ms Court in the case of CIT vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (1986) 52 CTR (SC) 75 : (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC) in which it has been held that since the Corporation was established for the purpose of providing efficient transport system, having no profit motive, though it earns income in the process, it is not liable to income-tax. 12. Applying the ratio of the said judgment in the case of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (supra), we find…

M/S. Rajasthan Cricket Association, Jaipur vs. Add.CIT. Range-2, Jaipur

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

ITA 284/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT) &

…ctions 73, 74 and 75 of the 1981 Act. The income earned by the Board is deployed for the development of minor ports in the State of Gujarat. In the circumstance , in our view the judgment of this court in Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation [1986] 159 ITR 1 squarely applies to the facts of the present case”. (emphasis added) In “Commissioner of Income Tax v. Krishi Upaj mandi Samiti, jaisalmer”, 24. (2011) 331 ITR 135 (Raj.), a Bench of this court while considering the entitlement of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, a statutory body, constituted and established under the Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Market…

Asstt. CIT (E)-1(1), Mumbai vs. All India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai

In the result, we hereby set-aside the order of CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the benefit of Sec

ITA 2108/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

…v. Bar Council of Maharashtra, (1981) 130 ITR 28; a public utility undertaking such as a State Road Transport Corporation was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation 159 ITR 1. In all these cases the common thread which was noticed to run through was the absence of any motive of private profit. These decisions do establish that the receipts derived by a chamber of commerce and industry for performing specific services to its members, though treated as business income under Section 28(iii) would still be entitled to the e…

Confederation of Indian Textile Industry, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, we hereby set-aside the order of CIT(A) and the Assessing

ITA 2435/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Confederation Of Indian Vs. Ito(E)(1)(2), Mumbai Textile Industry 1508, Maker Chamber V-221 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No.Aaact0174H (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 25

…v. Bar Council of Maharashtra, (1981) 130 ITR 28; a public utility undertaking such as a State Road Transport Corporation was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation 159 ITR 1. In all these cases the common thread which was noticed to run through was the absence of any motive of private profit. These decisions do establish that the receipts derived by a chamber of commerce and industry for performing specific services to its members, though treated as business income under Section 28(iii) would still be entitled to the e…

Shree Shree Mohanananda Samaj Seva Samity, Kolkata vs. ITO(E) WD-1(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2650/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz)] I.T.A. No. 2650/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shree Shree Mohanananda Samaj Seva Samity.......................................………........Appellant Ae-467, Salt Lake City, Kolkata – 700 064. [Pan: Aadts 7675 N] Vs Ito, (Exemption)Ward 1(3) Kolkata...................……………………………………….....Respondent 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata – 700 071. Appearances By: Shri V.N. Datta, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 12, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 05, 2020 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 25, Kolkata Dated 18.10.2019 & The Issue Involved Therein Relates To The Disallowance Of Assessee’S Claim For Exemption Of Rs. 13,48,365/- U/S 11(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Assessee In The Present Case Is A Trust Which Is Registered U/S 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Was Filed By The Assessee On 08.11.2010 Declaring Its Total Income At Nil. Although The Said Return Was Initially Processed By The Ao U/S 143(1) Of The Act, The Assessment Was Subsequently Reopened By Him & A Notice U/S 148 Was Issued By Him To The Assessee On 26.03.2015. In Reply, A Letter Was Filed By The Assessee Requesting That The Return Filed Originally On 08.11.2010 Be Treated As The Return Filed In Response To Notice U/S 148. As Noticed By The Ao, The Assessee Had Set Apart A Fund Of Rs. 13,48,365/- During The Year Under Consideration By Virtue Of Section 11(2) Of The Act. In 2 I.T.A. No. 2650/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shree Shree Mohanananda Samaj Seva Samity

Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148

…t public charitable purposes like hospital, second educational institutions and Tirthasharm in the Form 10 filed by the assessee on 27.10.1995. 6. Moreover, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT, A.P. vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (159 ITR 1) held that the test is ‘what is the predominant object of the activity – whether it is to carry out a charitable purpose or to earn profit? If the predominant object is to carry out a charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity. 7. In view of the…

Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward-1, Jaipur vs. M/S Rajasthan Cricekt Association, Jaipur

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

ITA 1356/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Dec 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT) &

…ctions 73, 74 and 75 of the 1981 Act. The income earned by the Board is deployed for the development of minor ports in the State of Gujarat. In the circumstance , in our view the judgment of this court in Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation [1986] 159 ITR 1 squarely applies to the facts of the present case”. (emphasis added) In “Commissioner of Income Tax v. Krishi Upaj mandi Samiti, jaisalmer”, 24. (2011) 331 ITR 135 (Raj.), a Bench of this court while considering the entitlement of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, a statutory body, constituted and established under the Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Market…

Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward-1, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan Cricket Association, Jaipur

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

ITA 1355/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Dec 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT) &

…ctions 73, 74 and 75 of the 1981 Act. The income earned by the Board is deployed for the development of minor ports in the State of Gujarat. In the circumstance , in our view the judgment of this court in Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation [1986] 159 ITR 1 squarely applies to the facts of the present case”. (emphasis added) In “Commissioner of Income Tax v. Krishi Upaj mandi Samiti, jaisalmer”, 24. (2011) 331 ITR 135 (Raj.), a Bench of this court while considering the entitlement of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, a statutory body, constituted and established under the Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Market…

Devki Devi Foundation, New Delhi vs. DIT (Exemptions), New Delhi

ITA 1027/DEL/2012[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2019

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: -- Devki Devi Foundation, Vs Dit (Exemptions), Plot No.15, 3Rd Floor, 2, Press Enclave Road, Saket, Aayakar Bhawan, New Delhi. Laxmi Nagar District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aaatd5283G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate & Shri Deepesh Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms Nidhi Srivastava, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.10.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2011 Of The Dit (Exemptions), Delhi Withdrawing Registration Granted Earlier U/S 12A Of The It Act Since Inception.

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT, DR
Section 12A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: -- Devki Devi Foundation, Vs DIT (Exemptions), Plot No.15, 3rd Floor, 2, Press Enclave Road, Saket, Aayakar Bhawan, New Delhi. Laxmi Nagar District Centre, New Delhi. PAN: AAATD5283G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate, Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate & Shri Deepesh Jain, CA Revenue by : Ms Nidhi Srivastava, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 27.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 22.10.2019 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: The appeal filed…

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Exemption) -2(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 5577/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 2Section 2(15)

…d. 24. Per contra learned Departmental Representative submitted that learned CIT(A) has passed a very elaborate order. He fully placed reliance thereupon. Further learned Departmental Representative submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of APSRTC (159 ITR 1) has on similar facts clearly held that in the context of Article 289 of the Constitution of India the income of APSRTC cannot be held as income of the State Government. Learned Departmental Representative submitted that in fact the assessee (MSRTC) has never claimed nor has been allowed exemption from the tax on the basis that it is an agent of Ma…

DCIT (Exemption), Ghaziabad vs. M/S. Divya Yog Mandir Trust, Haridwar

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 779/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit(Exemptions), Divya Yog Mandir Trust, Room No. 105, 1St Floor, Kripalu Bagh, Cgo-Ii, Vs Kankhal, Kamla Nehru Nagar, Haridwar. Ghaziabad. (Pan: Aaatd1114E) Appellant Respondent Department By: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, C.I.T. Dr Assessee By: Shri Rohti Jain, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.07.2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rohti Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms nidhi Srivastava, C.I.T. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 43B

…d. AR has placed reliance in this regard on the following decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Surat Art Silk Manufacturers (supra) :— 41 Assessment year 2013-14 CIT v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corpn. [1986] - 159 ITR 1 (SC) - Victoria Technical Institute (supra) - Thiagarajar Charities (supra) - Aditanar Educational Institution (supra) - Bar Council of Maharashtra (supra) - American Hotel Lodging Association Education Institute (supra) - Delhi Kannada Education Society (supra) - A.L.N. Rao Charitable Trust (supra) - Pullikal Medical Foundation (P.) Ltd: (…

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

…ndla 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 application that in the similar circumstances CIT had already granted registration to two sister con…

All India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (E)1(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 247/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 23Section 4Section 44A

…v. Bar Council of Maharashtra, (1981) 130 ITR 28; a public utility undertaking such as a State Road Transport Corporation was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation 159 ITR 1. In all these cases the common thread which was noticed to run through was the absence of any motive of private profit. These decisions do establish that the receipts derived by a chamber of commerce and industry for performing specific services to its members, though treated as business income under Section 28(iii) would still be entitled to the e…

All India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai vs. ADIT (E) II(2), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3994/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 23Section 4Section 44A

…v. Bar Council of Maharashtra, (1981) 130 ITR 28; a public utility undertaking such as a State Road Transport Corporation was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation 159 ITR 1. In all these cases the common thread which was noticed to run through was the absence of any motive of private profit. These decisions do establish that the receipts derived by a chamber of commerce and industry for performing specific services to its members, though treated as business income under Section 28(iii) would still be entitled to the e…

All India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1368/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 23Section 4Section 44A

…v. Bar Council of Maharashtra, (1981) 130 ITR 28; a public utility undertaking such as a State Road Transport Corporation was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation 159 ITR 1. In all these cases the common thread which was noticed to run through was the absence of any motive of private profit. These decisions do establish that the receipts derived by a chamber of commerce and industry for performing specific services to its members, though treated as business income under Section 28(iii) would still be entitled to the e…