CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd.

226 ITR 97Supreme Court of India1997#831 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.

125

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 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 80PSection 80P(2)(a)(i)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 143(2)Section 1961Section 57 of the Income Tax Act
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

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

Judgments citing CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd.

Shri Gopalkrishna Co-Operative Society Limited, Bhatkal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Karwar

ITA 23/PAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji06 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) Asstt Sr

Section 250Section 253(1)Section 80P(2)

…mutuality has to be tested transaction to transaction and instance to instance and to lift the veil it necessity to discern the nature of each transaction when so required’. And applying the dictum laid by their Lordships in ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club’ reported in 5 SCC 394 ‘a host of factors need to be considered to arrive at a conclusion as to at what point does the relationship of mutuality end and that of trading begin’. And this exercise, in our considered view needs to be undertaken for each assessment year separately, since each assessment year is a separate unit in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court i…

Shri Gopalkrishna Co-Operative Society Limited, Bhatkal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Karwar

ITA 22/PAN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji06 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) Asstt Sr

Section 250Section 253(1)Section 80P(2)

…mutuality has to be tested transaction to transaction and instance to instance and to lift the veil it necessity to discern the nature of each transaction when so required’. And applying the dictum laid by their Lordships in ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club’ reported in 5 SCC 394 ‘a host of factors need to be considered to arrive at a conclusion as to at what point does the relationship of mutuality end and that of trading begin’. And this exercise, in our considered view needs to be undertaken for each assessment year separately, since each assessment year is a separate unit in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court i…

The Marcel Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Marcel vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(3), Panaji

ITA 2/PAN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji06 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) Asstt Sr

Section 250Section 253(1)Section 80P(2)

…mutuality has to be tested transaction to transaction and instance to instance and to lift the veil it necessity to discern the nature of each transaction when so required’. And applying the dictum laid by their Lordships in ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club’ reported in 5 SCC 394 ‘a host of factors need to be considered to arrive at a conclusion as to at what point does the relationship of mutuality end and that of trading begin’. And this exercise, in our considered view needs to be undertaken for each assessment year separately, since each assessment year is a separate unit in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court i…

Shre Vile Parle Gujarati Mandal Chsl, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 25(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1769/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. Manshi Padhiar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anurag Tripathi, DR
Section 249(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…m) and by the Hon’ble Tribunal in the case of McKinsey & Company vs Joint Director of Income-tax (ITA No. 1598/M/2014). 3. The assessing officer by relying upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bankipur Club Limited (1997) 226 ITR 97 (SC) disallowed the said claim of the Assessee by holding as under: “From the above quoted decision of the Supreme Court, it is clear that there is a necessity that the participators in the surplus are contributors, In the instant case the transfer fees are given by the outgoing members therefore, it is very clear that they are not participators i…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1)(1), Surat vs. Pandesara Green Environment Water Welfare Coop. Society Limited, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 246/SRT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 194A(3)(v)Section 254(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 244, 245 & 246/Srt/2023 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2020-21) (Virtual hearing) A.C.I.T., Pandesara Green Environment Water Circle- 2(1)(1), Welfare Co-operative Society Limited, Vs. Surat. Plot No. 195, G.I.D.C., Opp. Wintex Mills, Pandesara. PAN No. AAAAP 0743 Q Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue Department represented by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr.DR Assessee represented by Shri Sapnesh Sheth, C.A. Date of Institution of Appeals 13/04/2023 Date of hear…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1)(1), Surat vs. Pandesara Green Environment Water Welfare Coop. Society Limited, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 245/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 194A(3)(v)Section 254(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 244, 245 & 246/Srt/2023 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2020-21) (Virtual hearing) A.C.I.T., Pandesara Green Environment Water Circle- 2(1)(1), Welfare Co-operative Society Limited, Vs. Surat. Plot No. 195, G.I.D.C., Opp. Wintex Mills, Pandesara. PAN No. AAAAP 0743 Q Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue Department represented by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr.DR Assessee represented by Shri Sapnesh Sheth, C.A. Date of Institution of Appeals 13/04/2023 Date of hear…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1)(1), Surat vs. Pandesara Green Environment Water Welfare Coop. Society Limited, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 244/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 194A(3)(v)Section 254(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 244, 245 & 246/Srt/2023 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2020-21) (Virtual hearing) A.C.I.T., Pandesara Green Environment Water Circle- 2(1)(1), Welfare Co-operative Society Limited, Vs. Surat. Plot No. 195, G.I.D.C., Opp. Wintex Mills, Pandesara. PAN No. AAAAP 0743 Q Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue Department represented by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr.DR Assessee represented by Shri Sapnesh Sheth, C.A. Date of Institution of Appeals 13/04/2023 Date of hear…

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

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

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

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

…tion u/s 80P of the Act and disallowed the claim of entire deduction holding it as AOP. In framing the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on dec…

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

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

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

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

…tion u/s 80P of the Act and disallowed the claim of entire deduction holding it as AOP. In framing the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on dec…

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

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

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

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

…tion u/s 80P of the Act and disallowed the claim of entire deduction holding it as AOP. In framing the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on dec…

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

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

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

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

…tion u/s 80P of the Act and disallowed the claim of entire deduction holding it as AOP. In framing the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on dec…

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

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

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

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

…tion u/s 80P of the Act and disallowed the claim of entire deduction holding it as AOP. In framing the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on dec…

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

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

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

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

…tion u/s 80P of the Act and disallowed the claim of entire deduction holding it as AOP. In framing the aforestated assessment, the Ld. AO placed his reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court of India in the case of ‘CIT Vs Bankipur Club Ltd.’ reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC) [equivalent citation 92 taxman 278] and ‘Chelmsford Club Vs CIT’ reported in 243 ITR 89 (SC) [equivalent citation 109 taxman 215]. While dislodging other claims made u/s 80P(2) of the Act, ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 10 M/s S K & Udupi District Cooperative Fish Marketing Federation Ltd. ITA No’s.38 to 43/PAN/2022 Ld. AO reliance also placed on dec…

The Saturday Club Limited vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata -3

The appeals are disposed of

ITA/127/2019HC Calcutta07 Jul 2023

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY

Section 22Section 23Section 260A

…xcess that is realised from the 5 members will be used for the benefit of the members in some form or other.” Thereafter, Mr. Murarka took us through several other decisions on this point, namely, Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bankipur Club Ltd. reported in 226 ITR 97, Chelmsford Ford v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 289 ITR 89, Bangalore Club v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 350 ITR 509 and Saturday Club Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner, Service Tax Cell reported in (2005) Cal LT 575. In reply, learned counsel for the revenue cited a very recent decision in Yum! Resautrants (Marketing) Private…

The Saturday Club Limited vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 3

The appeals are disposed of

ITA/138/2019HC Calcutta07 Jul 2023

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY

Section 22Section 23Section 260A

…xcess that is realised from the 5 members will be used for the benefit of the members in some form or other.” Thereafter, Mr. Murarka took us through several other decisions on this point, namely, Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bankipur Club Ltd. reported in 226 ITR 97, Chelmsford Ford v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 289 ITR 89, Bangalore Club v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 350 ITR 509 and Saturday Club Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner, Service Tax Cell reported in (2005) Cal LT 575. In reply, learned counsel for the revenue cited a very recent decision in Yum! Resautrants (Marketing) Private…

Arulmigu Athi Karumapuram Sellandiamman Kudippaattukararkal Seva Trust, Namakkal vs. CIT (Exemptions), Chennai

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

ITA 705/CHNY/2018[-]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 May 2023

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.705/Chny/2018 Arulmigu Aathi Karumapuram The Commissioner Of Sellandiamman Kudipaattukarakal Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions), Seva Trust, C/O Shri N. Chennai – 600 034. Subramaniyan, Advocate, 478, New Addl. Law Chambers, High Court Campus, Chennai 600 104. [Pan: Aafta7759M] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri N. Subrmaniyan, Advocate : ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri M. Rajan, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 07.03.2023 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai Dated 29.12.2017 Passed Under Section 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: A. That The Order Of The Learned Cit(E) Is Erroneous In Law & Is Against The Principles Of Natural Justice. B. The Learned Cit(E) Erred In Not Considering The Grounds Of Appeal, Written Submissions & The Decisions In Proper Perspective. C. The Learned Cit (E) Committed Grave Errors In Not Taking Into Consideration That The Appellant Is Nothing But An Association Of Persons In The Eye Of Law

Section 12ASection 2(24)Section 2(31)

…ust is only a convenient entity formed to carry out the objects and it does not receive any contributions from any one and thus satisfy all the ingredients required to apply doctrine of mutuality as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chelmsford Club, (2000) 3 SCC 214 and the learned CIT even failed to refer the judgment relied upon by the Appellant before passing the impugned judgment which is perverse. D. That the finding of the learned CIT(E) in paragraph 2 (as well as in paragraph 4) of the impugned order that “the sources for the income of the Appellant Trust is from the lease amount derived from the lands…

Cricket Club of India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 1, Mumbai

Accordingly, concise Ground No. 1 raised by the Appellant in appeal for the Assessment Year 2012-13 is allowed while all the other grounds raised by the Appellant are dismissed as being infructuous

ITA 3652/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri R. MurlidharFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…or an International Cricket Match and IPL Match. This is evident from para 6.3. of the order of ld. PCIT. 4.1. We find that the ld. AR before us submitted that the assessee was a party before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Bankipur Club Ltd reported in 226 ITR 97 (SC). The facts of the assessee's case relating to the Asst Years 1977- 78 and 1978-79 are discussed at pages 106 and 107 of the judgement. The Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the findings of the Tribunal and the Hon'ble High Court that the assessee is a mutual association and that the income from property let out to members is exempt from tax on the…

Jubhliee Hills International Centre vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed

ITTA/205/2005HC Telangana04 Jan 2023

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

For Appellant: Mr. Challa GunaranjanFor Respondent: Mr. J.V.Prasad, Standing Counsel
Section 13Section 260A

…pellant : Mr. Challa Gunaranjan ^ Counsel for Respondent : Mr. J.V.Prasad, Standing Counsel, IT Department < GIST:  HEAD NOTE: ? CASES REFERRED: (2014) 13 SCC 459 (2008) 302 ITR 279 (1997) 5 SCC 394 ::2:: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI I.T.T.A.No.205 of 2005 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan) Heard Mr. Challa Gunaranjan, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department for the respondent. 2…

ITO 7(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Prabhadevi Properties & Trading Company Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5873/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 7(3)(4) V. M/S. Prabhadevi Properties & Trading Company Ltd., Cgo Building, 8Th Floor, Room No. 805 “The Peregrine” 400 Pratishtha Bhavan, M.K. Road Veer Savarkar Marg Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400025 Pan: Aaacp4718R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agarwal & Shri Atul Suraiya Department By : Shri Jagdish Jangid

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Jagdish Jangid
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…ated the above said non-refundable outstanding creditors as income of the assessee u/s.68 of the Act. 6. Further, assessee claimed the benefit of mutuality in its case by referring to the Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of CIT v. Bankipur Club Ltd., (226 ITR 97) the Assessing Officer denied the same by 5 Prabhadevi Properties & Trading Company Ltd., distinguishing the said decision stating that the case of the assessee is distinguishable as the same is not club. Assessing Officer observed that assessee is a “person” in the form of “the company”, drawing up the annual accounts as per the requirement of Sc…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-2 vs. M/S. Expert Jewellers Pvt Ltd

The appeals are disposed of

ITAT/138/2019HC Calcutta26 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK

Section 22Section 23Section 260A

…xcess that is realised from the 5 members will be used for the benefit of the members in some form or other.” Thereafter, Mr. Murarka took us through several other decisions on this point, namely, Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bankipur Club Ltd. reported in 226 ITR 97, Chelmsford Ford v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 289 ITR 89, Bangalore Club v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 350 ITR 509 and Saturday Club Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner, Service Tax Cell reported in (2005) Cal LT 575. In reply, learned counsel for the revenue cited a very recent decision in Yum! Resautrants (Marketing) Private…