CIT v. Madras Stock Exchange Ltd.

105 ITR 546High Court1976#16494 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 12ABSection 2(15)

Judgments citing CIT v. Madras Stock Exchange Ltd.

MARWADI NAVYUVAK VACHANALAYA ,LATUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 561/PUN/2025[Not Applicable]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Sept 2025

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri R. K. Pandamarwadi Navyuvak Vachanalaya Cit(Exemption), Pune Marwadi Navyuvak Vachanal, Vs. Main Road, Latur – 413512 Pan: Aabtm2714L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bhuvanesh Kankani Department By : Shri Amol Khairnar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25-08-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-09-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Bhuvanesh KankaniFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

…of its educational institution on rentals and said income was used for educational institution itself, such income could not be brought to tax. 7. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Madras Stock Exchange Ltd. (1976) 105 ITR 546 (Mad), he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that purchasing a building and letting out some surplus area was not indulging in any activity for profit and the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act cannot be denied to the assessee. He submitted that when the Revenue challenged the above decision of the Hon’ble Hig…

DURGAPUR SOCIETY OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, CIR-2, EXEMPT, KOL. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 498/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 498/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Durgapur Society Of Management Income Tax Officer, Circle-2, Science Vs Exempt, Kolkata Dr. Zakir Hussain Avenue Hudco More Bidhannager Durgapur - 713206 [Pan : Aaatd7804P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/09/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(E)”) Dt. 21/03/2023, Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. For That The Ld Pcit Erred In Setting Aside The Order In The Light Of The Judgement Of The Hon'Ble Apex Court In The Case Of New Noble Educational Society Pronounced On 19Th Oct, 2022 When The Judgement Itself Clearly Stated That It Should Be Applied Prospectively & Therefore The Order Of The Pcit Should Be Quashed Since The Order Passed By The Ao Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interests Of Revenue. 2. For That The Ld Pcit Erred In Holding That The Rent Received From The Building Which Was Let Out Since Lying Idle For Some Period Constituted Income From Business When The Objects The Predominant Object Of The Society Was Providing Education & 2

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R
Section 10Section 11(5)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…nce was placed on various judgements including that of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of DIT(Exemption) vs. Sahu ]ain Trust (supra) as well as the judgment of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Madras Stock Exchange Ltd. [1976] 105 ITR 546 and since two views were possible on the issue in challenge of which one was in favour of the assessee, the ld. Assessing Officer adopted the same considering the judgement of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court and allowed the benefit of Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act to the assessee. 11. So far as the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in…

SHANMUKHANANDA FINE ARTS & SANGEETHA SABHA,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (E) I(2),

ITA 1975/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./1975/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./6858/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 वष" Sri Shanmukhananda Fine Arts & Ddit (Exemption)-I-(2) Sangeetha Sabha Piramal Chambers, 5Th Floor 292,Comrade Harbanslal Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 012. Sion (East)Mumbai-400 022. Pan:Aaats 2694 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri V. Rajguru-Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta/Govind Javeri सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14/12/2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 02.03.2018 लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार /Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Orders Dated 20/01/2016 Of The Cit(A)-1, Mumbai The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Two Appeals For The Same A.Y.The First Appeal Is Against The Regular Appellate Order,Whereas The Second Appeal Is About The Rectification Application Filed Under Section 154 Of The Act. We Are Adjudicating Both The Appeals Together. Assessee-A Registered Trust,Filed Its Return Of Income On 27/09/2011,Along With The Income & Expenditure Account & Other Financial Statements Declaring Deficit Of Rs. 27.17 Crores. The Assessing Officer (Ao)Completed The Assessment On,10/03/2014,U/S. 143(3)Of The Act, Determining Its Income At Rs.4.51 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta/Govind JaveriFor Respondent: Shri V. Rajguru-CIT-DR
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2(15)

…of the trust as non charitable.He referred to the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in its own case of IA No. 214 of 2012 and the order of the Tribunal dtd.09.09.2011(ITA/1849/2011).For the rental receipt he relied upon case of Madras Stock Exchange Ltd.(105 ITR 546) and Woman’s India Trust(379 ITR 506).For Rule of consistency,he referred to the case of Shree Ram Memorial Foundation (158 ITR 3) and Excel Industries Ltd.(358 ITR 295).Cases of Thyaga Brahma Gana Sabha (188 ITR 160),Delhi Music Society(357 ITR 265) Jeevan Vidya Mission (ITA/770/ Mum/ 2014,dtd.30.09.2014)were relied upon to argue that music was…

DDIT, CHENNAI vs. THE SOUTH INDIAN FILM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 449/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George]

For Respondent: Shri. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…h Indian film industry. As per assessee it did not itself carry on any trade or commerce. Reliance was placed by the assessee on the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the ITA No. 449/Mds/2013. :- 4 -: case of CIT vs Madras Stock Exchange Ltd. 105 ITR 546 in which case, assessee was also tagged as one of the many respondents. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) after considering 5. the submissions of the assessee and analyzing the Section 2(15) of the Act as it stood prior to its substitution with effect amendment from 01.04.2009 and after such amendment, held that first proviso was attra…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. MADRAS STOCK EXCHANGE LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2546/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Feb 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri S.S. Godaraआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2546/Mds/2014 & C.O. No. 126/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri N. Madhavan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri V.S. Jayakumar, Advocate
Section 144ASection 43B

…ce the assessee has transferred a portion of Listing fee receipts to the Reserve accounts as per the order of SEBI. He further submitted that the status of the assessee was considered in the assessee's own case [CIT v. Madras Stock Exchange Ltd. And Others (105 ITR 546) (Mad.)] and the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court held that the assessee is carrying on a statutory function, i.e. to control and regulate the contracts relating to shares and securities. Accordingly, the Hon'ble Madras High Court held that the listing fees received by the assessee cannot be said to be an activity for profit within the meaning…

CIT v. Madras Stock Exchange Ltd. (105 ITR 546) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax