How many judgments cite CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd.?

114 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd. (226 ITR 97), spanning 2000 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 80P, Section 80P(2)(a)(i), Section 80P(2)(d), Section 143(2).

CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd.

226 ITR 97Supreme Court of India1997#943 most cited

What is CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd. authority for?

The doctrine of mutuality applies only when there is complete identity between the contributors to a common fund and the participants in its surplus. Income received from non-members or distinct classes of members who do not share this identity is not covered by mutuality and is taxable.

114

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2000 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd. · 226 ITR 97 · doctrine of mutuality · mutuality principle · identity of contributors participants · associate members · non-members income · Section 80P · co-operative society tax · clubs taxation · surplus distribution

Also reported as

92 Taxmann 278

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 80P Section 80P(2)(a)(i)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 143(2)Section 1961 Section 57 of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

doctrine of mutuality section 59(2)mutuality principle section 2(n)section 80(p)section 10(20)section 38 section 80(p)(2)section 59 section 80(p)(2)(d)section 80p(2)(a)section 57

Judgments citing CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd.

MARATHI BANDHKAM VYA vs. AYIK ASSOCIATION,PUNEVS.ITO, EXEMPTION WARD-1(1),PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 2310/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Milind Debaje (Virtual)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2310/PUN/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Marathi Bandhkam Vs. ITO, Exemption, Ward- Vyavsayik Association, 1(1), Pune. 201, 2nd Floor, Prol Business Centre, Opp. Ratna Hospital Centre, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411016. PAN : AACTM0747L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Suhas P. Bora Revenue by : Shri Milind Debaje (Virtual) Date of hearing : 17.11.2025 Date of pronouncement : 10.02.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This a…

AVKAR URBAN CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,SURAT vs. ACIT CIRCLE 3(3), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 715/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.715/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Avkar Urban Co-Op. Credit Soc. Vs. Acit, Ltd., Circle – 3(3), 113-114, Sunrise Chambers, Surat Varachha Road, Mini Bazar, Surat - 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaaa8341B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Aakash Bakashwala, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/12/2025

Section 143(2)Section 2Section 250Section 80Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…0P(2)(d) of the Act, deduction is available in respect of income by way of dividend and interest received by the co-operative society on its investment with any other co-operative society. The AO relied on the decision in cases of CIT vs. Bankimpur Club Ltd., 226 ITR 97 (SC), Surat Vankar Sahakari Sangh Ltd. vs. ACIT, TA No.73 to 96 of 2016 (Guj. – HC), Totagars’ Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. vs. ITO, Karnataka, (2010) 188 Taxman 288 (SC), Totagars’ Co- operative Sale Society Ltd. vs. PCIT, (2017) 83 taxmann.com 143 (Karnataka), Uttar Gujarat Uma Co-op. Soc. Ltd. vs. ITO, ITA No.1670 & 1671/Ahd/2018, SBI Employe…

VIHAN VIBHAG CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(2)(5), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 707/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.707/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Vihan Vibhag Credit Co-Operative Vs. Ito, Society Ltd., Ward – 2(2)(5), At & Po: Vihan, Tal – Kamrej, Surat Tapi – 394320, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabav5113F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Akshay M. Modi, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/11/2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…ciety is from its investment with Co-op. Bank in view of the restriction provided in sub-section (4) of section 80P of the Act. The AO has discussed provisions of section 80P(2)(d) of the Act and relying on the decision in case of CIT vs. Bankimpur Club Ltd., 226 ITR 97 (SC) and CIT vs. Adarsh Hsg Co-op Soc. Ltd., 213 ITR 677 (Guj.), he held that co-operative bank is rightly excluded from availing the benefits of deduction u/s 80P of the Act. As per section 80P(2)(d) of the Act, the co-operative banks cannot be considered as co-operative societies. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the interest income of Rs.23,79,77…

P Y C HINDU GYMKHANA,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

ITA 1321/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

…578/PUN/2016 and 2822/PUN/2016 respectively] 12 Decision of Hon'ble ITAT Pune in assessee's own case 87-92 for AY 2013-14 [ITA No.2084/PUN/2017 & 2272/PUN/2017] 13 Decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of 93-104 CIT vs. Bankipur Club Ltd. [(1997) 226 ITR 97] 14 Decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court of India in 105-111 case of CIT vs. Willingdon Sports Club [(2008) 302 ITR 279] 15 Decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court of India in 112-113 case of CIT-3 vs. Air Cargo Agents Association of India [(2016) 286 CTR 340 (Bom) 16 Decision of Hon'ble ITAT Pune in case of ACIT vs. 114-120 Poona Club Ltd. [ITA No…

HIMACHAL MITRA MANDAL CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD 1(2)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 777/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarhimachal Mitra Mandal V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds Cooperative Credit Society बनाम Ward – 1(2)(3), Room No. Limited 419, 4Th Floor, Cumballa Hill C/O Vaish Associates, 106, Mtnl Te Building, Peddar Peninsula Centre, Dr. S.S. Road, Dr. Gopalrao Rao Road, Parel, Mumbai – Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai – 400 012, Maharashtra 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaah0613D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Ms. Priyanka Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi,(Sr. DR)

Section 194A(3)(v)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271CSection 5

…of the society. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the principles of mutuality will not apply to associate members. With regard to the principles of mutuality, the Ld CIT(A) placed his reliance on the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Bankipur Club (226 ITR 97) and Chelmsford Club (243 ITR 89). Accordingly, he held that the associate members are distinctly different and they cannot be equated with regular members. Accordingly, the Ld CIT(A) held that the A.O. was justified in raising the impugned demands. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed these appeals before us, i.e., one against the demand raised u/s…

THE BHARATHI CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 851/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

…ot contribute to the surplus in the same manner as ordinary members, nor did they participate in its distribution. 14. The learned CIT(A) referred to the principle of mutuality as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd reported in 226 ITR 97 and reiterated in Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. (supra), that for mutuality to exist, all contributors to the common fund must be entitled to participate in the surplus and all participants in the surplus must be contributors, ensuring complete identity between contributors and participants. In the appellant’s case, the creation of a separate…

SIDDHARATHA PATTINA SAHAKARI SANGHA NIYAMITA,BELLARY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, HOSPET

ITA 2113/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Varun Bhat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 4Section 58Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Siddhartha Pattina Sahakari Sangha Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Niyamita, Ward – 1 & TPS, Hospet. DR B.R Ambedkar Building, Hospet, . Bellary – 583 201. PAN – AAMAS 4918 G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Varun Bhat, CA Revenue by : Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept. (DR) Date of hearing : 07.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee…

ASSOCIATION OF CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER GUJ-W-201-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 731/RJT/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.731/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2023-24) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Bakul Ganatra, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr.DR

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…me" is essentially redistributed to the members in mutual interest. Therefore, it cannot be considered taxable income. To reinforce this, we draw attention to significant judicial decisions supporting the mutuality principle CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR 97 (SC): The Supreme Court held that a club or association not formed for profit, and engaging in mutual activities exclusively among members, does not generate taxable income under the Income Tax Act. The Hon'ble Court ruled that as long as there is an identity of contributors and participants, the surplus from members fees, subscriptions, and cont…

POWER LOOM DEVELOPMENT AND EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEM) WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1060/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 11Section 12Section 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 25

…its of its members by virtue of which principle of mutuality applies. Respectfully, 13 I.T.A. No.1060/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Powerloom Development And Export Promotion Council following Apex Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Bankipor Club Ltd. 226 ITR 97 and applying the doctrine of mutuality, assessee's receipts from non-rmembers and other sources such as interest income etc. are treated as income of the assessee during the year and taxed accordingly. 5.1. The main contention of the Ld. AR is that, activities carried out are substantially with its members during year under consideration. Moreover…

BHARAT DIAMOND BOURSE,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (E)- 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 2219/MUM/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2025AY 2009-2010

Section 2(15)Section 45(1)Section 6

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, V.P. AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, AM\n\nITA No. 2219/Mum/2024\n(Assessment Year: 2009-10)\n\nBharat Diamond Bourse\nG Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex,\nBandra East-400051\n\nDCIT(E)-1(1),\nMumbai\n\nVs.\n\nPAN/GIR No. AAACB 2358R\n(Applicant)\n\nApplicant by\n\n(Respondent)\n\nShri B.M. Chatterji, Sr. Advocate,\nShri Shreyash Shah, Advocate,\nShri Kunal Shah, CA And\nShri Udyan Mukherjee, Advocate\nMs. Monika H. Pande, Sr. AR\n\nRespondent by\n\nDate of Hearing\n\n12.12.2024\n\nDate of Pronouncement\n\n12.03.2025\n\nORDER…

INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION OF CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 760/CHANDI/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी िव"म िसंह यादव, लेखा सद" एवं "ी परेश म. जोशी, "ाियक सद" BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM & SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI, JM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO. 760/Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Industries Association of बनाम The ITO Chandigarh Ward, Chandigarh 140, Industrial Area, Phase-2 Chandigarh- 160002 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAAAI0450K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Vineet Krishan, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : S…

THE IMPERIAL CONDOMINIUM ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18 are allowed

ITA 4983/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 57

…ready quoted from the judgments where reference is to members as a class and that class may be diminished by members going out or increased by the members coming in. But the class remains the same. As already noted by the Supreme Court in Bankipur Club [1997] 226 ITR 97, the identity must be as a class of contributors and participants and it does not matter that the class may be diminished or increased by members going out or coming in. Similarly, it is not necessary that each member should contribute or each member should participate in the surplus and get back from the surplus what he has paid, as long as they…

THE IMPERIAL CONDOMINIUM ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18 are allowed

ITA 4982/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 57

THE IMPERIAL CONDOMINIUM ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -19(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18 are allowed

ITA 4980/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 57

THE IMPERIAL CONDOMINIUM ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE 19(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AYs 2014-15 to 2017-18 are allowed

ITA 4979/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 57

M/S GYMKHANA CLUB,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, W-3, PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1305/CHANDI/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.D.Jain, Vice Prersident & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकर अपील सं./Ita No 1305/Chd/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S Gymkhana Club, Vs The Ito, Sector 6, Ward-3, Panchkula. Panchkula. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaaag0115B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By: Shri S.K.Mukhi, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2024 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/10/2024 Physical Hearing आदेश/Order Per Vikram Singh Yadav,A.M.

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Mukhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 234B

…o Rs.23,100/-. 6. Against the levy of interest under Section 234B and 234D, the assessee carried the matter in a ppeal before the ld. CIT(A) and it was submitted that following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CI T V Bankipur Club Ltd. [1997] 226 ITR 97 (S.C.) and Che lmsford Club V CIT [2000] 243 ITR 89, the Co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal had decided the issue of principle of mutuality as well as that of A.Y. 2009-2010 8 chargeability of interest on amounts lying in banks/FDRs in favour of assessee club as per its common order for various years and copy of the said order was brought to noti…

ACIT, RANGE-1, LUCKNOW vs. M/S MOHAMED BAGH CLUB LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 435/LKW/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.-2014-15 Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S Mohamed Bagh Club, Limited, Income Tax, Range-I, Vs. 202, M.G. Marg, Lucknow-226001 Lucknow Pan:Aaccm2600B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rohit Bhalla, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2024 O R D E R Per Sh. Nikhil Choudhary: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Lucknow Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act Dated 16.09.2020. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred Read As Under:-

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Bhalla, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. CIT

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…s were common. He relied upon the decision of Hon’ble ITAT, Lucknow Bench ‘SMC’ in ITA Nos. 42 to 45/Alld/2000 in the case of Income Tax Officer vs. Ganges Club Limited, Kanpur and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bankipore Club Limited [1997] 226 ITR 97 (SC) wherein it had been held that since members/contributors had contributed for the mutual benefit of all members of the Club, the doctrine of mutuality was evidently applicable on the Club and hence income from members should be treated as exempt. It was further submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chelmsford Club vs. CIT 243…

K1104 ELAAMUTHUR PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SCOIETY,TIRUPPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2(4), TIRUPPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the

ITA 1041/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 1040 & 1041/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 K 1104 Elayamuthur Primary Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Co-Operative Credit V. Ward -2(4), Society, Tirupur. Elayamuthur, Udumalpet, Tirupur – 642 154. [Pan: Aabak-3636-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. R.V. Aroonprasaad, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2024

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R.V. AroonPrasaad, Addl.CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…ct members. When there is provision for unequal rights between different sets of members, the concept of Principle of Mutuality is misplaced. 10. On the test of mutuality, Honorable Supreme Court in its judgment in the case of CIT vs Bankipur Club Ltd (1997) 226 ITR 97 (SC) held as below: ".....for this doctrine to apply, it is essential that all the contributories to the common fund are entitled to participate in the surplus and that all its participants in the surplus are contributors, so that there is complete identity between contributors and participators.." 11. As detailed in the preceding paras, in asse…

K1104 ELAYAMUTHUR PROMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,TIRUPPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2(4), TIRUPPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for both the

ITA 1040/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R.V. AroonPrasaad, Addl.CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

ANDHRA PRADESH ADVOCATES WELFARE FUND,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2), HYDERABAD,

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 664/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.R. Suresh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT(DR) &

Section 23Section 3

…AP Advocates Welfare Fund, the assessee, filed its return of income declaring an income of Rs. Nil in the on 30/03/2018 claiming Exemption under Mutuality, resting its claim on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Bankipur Club Ltd.; (226 ITR 97 (SC)). Learned Assessing Officer also recorded that the assessee claimed the Status of Local Authority. The case was selected for scrutiny through “CASS” to examine the “deduction against income from other sources”. Learned Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee received a sum of Rs. 6,63,48,049/- Life membership fee, Nomination fee, Certific…

Showing 1–20 of 114 · Page 1 of 6