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

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

…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…

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

…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…

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

…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…

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

…n 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…

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

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 745/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishia Y 2010-11 Acit (Exemption) Vs Divya Yog Mandir Trust Circle, Cgo-1 Kripalu Bag, Hapur Road, Kankhal, Haridwar Ghaziabad (Pan Aaatd1114E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh. Rohit Jain, Advocate
Section 11Section 12Section 143Section 2(15)

…it arises form the activity. Ld. 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) :— - 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: (supra) -…

Sree Sree Mohanananda Brahmachari Medical Welfare Trust, Kolkata vs. DDIT(E)-1, Kolkata

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

ITA 1333/KOL/2014[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2017AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1333/Kol/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03 Sree Sree Mohanananda Vs. Ddit(E)-I, Kolkata Brahmachari Medical Welfare Trust 10B Middleton Row, Kolkata- Ae-467, Salt Lake City, 700071 Kolkata – 700 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadts 0083 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellantby :Shri M. K. Biswas,Acit Dr Respondent By :Shri Vigyaneshwarnathdatta, Advocate सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/08/2017 घोषणाक"तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2002-03, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals)-Xiv, Kolkata, In Appeal No.762/Cit(A)-Xiv/2011-12, Dated 18.03.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 254/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 14.11.2011. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Reads As Under: “1.For That The Order Of Assessment Is Void Ab Initio, Bad In Law & Is Neither Tenable In Law Nor In Facts. 2.For That The Assessment Order Is Opposed To Requirement In Law & Without Jurisdiction. 3.For That The Assessment Is Made In Arbitrary, Violence Of Natural Justice, Without Application Of Mind & Not Tenable In Law. 4.For That The Order Of Authorities Below Is Grossly Unjustified In Disallowing The Claim Of Rs.54,83,854/- U/S 11(2) Of The Act. The Contention Of The Assessing Officer Is Neither Tenable In Law Nor In Facts.

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Biswas,ACIT DRFor Respondent: Shri VigyaneshwarNathDatta, Advocate
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 254

…earmarked for public charitable purposes like Hospital, education institutions and Trithashram in the Form 10 filed by the assessee on 27.10.1995.However, 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 society – 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. 8.Having heard the…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Coporation (Msrtc), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5393/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Maharashtra State Road Income Tax (Exemptions)- Transport Corporation 2(1), (Msrtc), Room No.519, 5Th Floor, Vs. Maharashtra Vahatuk Piramal Chambers, Bhavan, Lalbaug, Dr. Anant Rao Nair Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 008 Mumbai - 400077 Pan: Aaacm 4699J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Maharashtra State Road Assistant Director Of Income Transport Corporation Tax (Exemption)-I(1), (Msrtc), Mumbai Maharashtra Vahatuk Vs. Bhavan, Dr. Anant Rao Nair Marg, Mumbai-400 008 Pan: Aaacm 4699J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena, D.R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner of M/s. Maharashtra State Road Income Tax (Exemptions)- Transport Corporation 2(1), (MSRTC), Room No.519, 5th Floor, Vs. Maharashtra Vahatuk Piramal Chambers, Bhavan, Lalbaug, Dr. Anant Rao Nair Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 008 Mumbai - 400077 PAN: AAACM 4699J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Maharashtra State Road Assistant Director of Income Transport Corporation Tax (Exemption)-I(1), (MSRTC),…

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Mumbai vs. ADIT (Exemption) -I (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5327/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Maharashtra State Road Income Tax (Exemptions)- Transport Corporation 2(1), (Msrtc), Room No.519, 5Th Floor, Vs. Maharashtra Vahatuk Piramal Chambers, Bhavan, Lalbaug, Dr. Anant Rao Nair Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 008 Mumbai - 400077 Pan: Aaacm 4699J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Maharashtra State Road Assistant Director Of Income Transport Corporation Tax (Exemption)-I(1), (Msrtc), Mumbai Maharashtra Vahatuk Vs. Bhavan, Dr. Anant Rao Nair Marg, Mumbai-400 008 Pan: Aaacm 4699J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena, D.R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner of M/s. Maharashtra State Road Income Tax (Exemptions)- Transport Corporation 2(1), (MSRTC), Room No.519, 5th Floor, Vs. Maharashtra Vahatuk Piramal Chambers, Bhavan, Lalbaug, Dr. Anant Rao Nair Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 008 Mumbai - 400077 PAN: AAACM 4699J (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Maharashtra State Road Assistant Director of Income Transport Corporation Tax (Exemption)-I(1), (MSRTC),…

D.D.I.T (E) - I, Kolkata vs. Shree Shree Mohanananda Brahmachari Medical Welfare Trust, Kolkata

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

ITA 1042/KOL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1042/Kol/2013 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04 Ddte(E)-I, Kolkata Vs. Shree 5Th Floor, 10B Middleton Row, Mohananandabrahmachari Kolkata-700071 Medical Welfare Trust Ae-467, Salt Lake City, Kolkata – 700 064. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadts 0083 J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellantby :Shri M. K. Biswas,Acit Dr Respondent By :Shri Vigyaneshwarnathdatta, Advocate सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/08/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18/10/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2003-04, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Jalpaiguri, In Appeal No.763/Cit(A)-Xiv/11-12, Dated 06.03.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 254/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 14.11.2011. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri M. K. Biswas,ACIT DRFor Respondent: Shri VigyaneshwarNathDatta, Advocate
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 13Section 143Section 143(3)Section 254

…earmarked for public charitable purposes like Hospital, education institutions and Trithashram in the Form 10 filed by the assessee on 27.10.1995.However, 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 society – 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. Shree MohananandaBr…

M/S. Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association, Indore vs. The DCIT 1(1), Indore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed and consequently the order of the Ld

ITA 782/IND/2014[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaassessment Year: 2012-13 Madhya Pradesh Cricket Dcit, 1(1), Association Indore बनाम/ Holkar Stadium, Vs. 7, Race Course Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aaatg3527C Appellant By Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Shri Arpit Gaur (Ar) Revenue By Shri Lal Chand (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 21.03.2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.06.2017

Section 13Section 2Section 2(15)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCHE, INDORE "ी च""मोहन गग", "या"यक सद"य तथा "ी ओ.पी.मीना, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Madhya Pradesh Cricket DCIT, 1(1), Association Indore बनाम/ Holkar Stadium, Vs. 7, Race Course Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.AAATG3527C Appellant by Shri Anil Kamal Garg, & Shri Arpit Gaur (AR) Revenue by Shri Lal Chand (CIT-DR) Date of Hearing: 21.03.2017 Date of Pronouncement: 14.06.2017 आदेश / O R D E R PER CHANDRAMOHAN GA…

Dy D.I.T. (E)-I(1), Mumbai vs. The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (Mmrda), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 4177/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Ronak G. Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, D.R
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 13

…relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat Maritime Board 295 ITR 561 and further on the conclusions derived in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. AP State Roadways Transport Corporation 159 ITR 1 and DIT vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse 259 ITR 280 and concluded that for the purpose of falling under section 11 it was not necessary that the status of assessee should be that of a Trust and any institution or Trust was entitled to claim exemption, if it is satisfied the M/s. The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) conditions ment…

M/S. Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority, Mumbai vs. The ADIT(E) RG- 1, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 3841/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Ronak G. Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, D.R
Section 10Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 13

…relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat Maritime Board 295 ITR 561 and further on the conclusions derived in the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. AP State Roadways Transport Corporation 159 ITR 1 and DIT vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse 259 ITR 280 and concluded that for the purpose of falling under section 11 it was not necessary that the status of assessee should be that of a Trust and any institution or Trust was entitled to claim exemption, if it is satisfied the M/s. The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) conditions ment…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. M/s Indur Green Power Private Limited

ITTA/627/2015HC Telangana02 Jun 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Sri.G.Sanjay Chowdary

ITTA/593/2015HC Telangana01 Jun 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

M/S. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, Uttar Pradesh vs. CIT (E), Lucknow

The appeal is allowed

ITA 113/DEL/2016[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2016

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: -- Greater Noida Industrial Development Vs. Cit(E), Authority, H-169, Chitvan Estate, Lucknow. Sector-Gamma, Gr. Noida City, District – Gautam Budh Nagar. Uttar Pradesh. (Pan: Aaalg0129L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: - - Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Vs. Cit(E), Authority, First Floor, Commercial Complex, Lucknow. P-2, Sector-Omega 1, Greater Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. (Pan: Aaalt0341D) Assessee By: S/Shri Balbir Singh & Abhinav Mehrotra, Adv., Sk Gupta & Ms. Raj Rani, Cas. Department By: Shri Sandeep Kumar, Cit( Dr) Date Of Hearing : 02 .03.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 18 :05.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:

For Appellant: S/Shri Balbir Singh & AbhinavFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar, CIT( DR)
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 3Section 6

…, would not prevent the institution from being a valid charity [Addl. CIT vs. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturer Association [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC)]." 20 Applying the ratio laid down in the case of CIT vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation [1986] 159 ITR 1 (SC), where of in the present case, the "Autonomous Authority" was established for the purpose of predominant of development the area and provide to shelter to the homeless people within the State of U.P. The management and control of the Authority is essentially with the State Government and there is no profit motive as the income earned by the Au…

Director of Income Tax vs. M/S Group Vocational

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/199/2015HC Karnataka23 Feb 2016

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

Section 12ASection 12aSection 13Section 2(15)Section 260

…ing a valid charity-Addl. CIT vs Surat Art Silk Cloth Mfrs. Association [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC). 11. The present case in our view is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT vs. 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”. 8 4.2.5. In our considered opinion, the factual matrix of the case on hand clearly evidences that the assessee…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. The Bagalkot Town Development Authority

ITA/100027/2014HC Karnataka15 Dec 2015

Bench: S.ABDUL NAZEER,P.S.DINESH KUMAR

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12Section 260ASection 263

…prevent the 14 institution from being a valid charity (CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers' Assn3 ). 14. The present case in our view is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in CIT v. A.P. SRTC [(1986) 2 SCC 391: 1986 SCC (Tax) 393 : (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”. 9. In instant case also assessee is a statutory authority created under the Karnataka Improvement Boards Act to carry out…

Phd Chamber of Commerce & Industry vs. Director of Income Tax - Exemptions

ITA/369/2012HC Delhi19 Oct 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12A

…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 tlrread 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 mernbers, though treated as business income under Section 28(iii) would still be entitled to the…

Phd Chamber of Commerce & Industry vs. Director of Income Tax -Exemptions

ITA/368/2012HC Delhi19 Oct 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12A

…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 tlrread 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 mernbers, though treated as business income under Section 28(iii) would still be entitled to the…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

ITTA/251/2008HC Telangana01 Mar 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

For Respondent: Ms. K.Lalitha, Standing Counsel for
Section 10(20)Section 10(29)Section 12ASection 260ASection 4Section 4(1)

…Agricultural Market Committees ? Cases referred 1. (2007) 295 ITR 561 : (2007) 14 SCC 704 2. (1939) VII ITR 415 (PC) 3. (1965) LV ITR 722 (SC) 4. (1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC) : (1980) 2 SCC 31 5. (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC) 6. (2007) 291 ITR 419 (Bom) 7. (2007) 294 ITR 563 (P&H) 8. (2009) 308 ITR 380 (MP) 9. (2009) 308 ITR 401 (MP) 10. AIR 1959 SC 300 11. AIR 1962 SC 97 12. AIR 1962 SC 1517 13. AIR 1968 SC 1408 14. AIR 1983 SC 1246 : (1983) 4 SCC 353 15. (1939) VII ITR 415 (PC) 16. (1965) LV ITR 722 (SC) 17. (1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC) : (19…