CIT v. Tata Steel Ltd.

203 ITR 704Reported decision#9520 most cited

What is CIT v. Tata Steel Ltd. authority for?

A trust's exemption under Section 11 is not automatically denied if benefits like priority plot allotment or price concessions are given to employees who are not 'authors' as defined in Section 13(3). This judgment clarifies that not all employee benefits necessarily violate Section 13(3) of the Income Tax Act.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tata Steel Ltd. · 203 ITR 704 · Section 11 · Section 13(3) · charitable trust exemption · employee benefits · plot allotment · price concessions · income tax act

Judgments citing CIT v. Tata Steel Ltd.

M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 701/LKW/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

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

…e Act. Such findings were based on the fact that the allotment of plots were made to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: Page 82 of 86 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemp…

M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 166/LKW/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

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

…e Act. Such findings were based on the fact that the allotment of plots were made to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: Page 82 of 86 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemp…

M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed whereas the Cross Objections of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 165/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

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

…e Act. Such findings were based on the fact that the allotment of plots were made to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: Page 82 of 86 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemp…

Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vs. M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

ITA 24/LKW/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 2(15)

…the allotment of plots were made Page 239 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemption under section 11 of the Act by holding th…

Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vs. M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

ITA 23/LKW/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 2(15)

…the allotment of plots were made Page 239 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemption under section 11 of the Act by holding th…

Astt. Commisioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vs. M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

ITA 211/LKW/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 2(15)

…the allotment of plots were made Page 239 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemption under section 11 of the Act by holding th…

Astt. Commisioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vs. M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

ITA 210/LKW/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 2(15)

…the allotment of plots were made Page 239 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemption under section 11 of the Act by holding th…

Astt. Commisioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vs. M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

ITA 165/LKW/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 2(15)

…the allotment of plots were made Page 239 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemption under section 11 of the Act by holding th…

Astt. Commisioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vs. M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

ITA 164/LKW/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 2(15)

…the allotment of plots were made Page 239 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemption under section 11 of the Act by holding th…

Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vs. M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

ITA 631/LKW/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 2(15)

…the allotment of plots were made Page 239 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemption under section 11 of the Act by holding th…

Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow vs. M/S U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow

In the result, all the grounds taken in the appeals and ground 1 of additional grounds of the Revenue stand dismissed and additional ground

ITA 630/LKW/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 15Section 2(15)

…the allotment of plots were made Page 239 of 242 (UP AWAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD) to the employees of the assessee who are not part of the author as defined in section 13(3) of the Act and while holding so had relied on the judgment of CIT vs. Tata Steel Ltd. 203 ITR 704. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below: “This Stay Petition has been filed by the assessee with a request to stay the recovery of demand of Rs.3,01,83,05,459/- till disposal of the appeal. 2. The demand has risen due to addition made by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the exemption under section 11 of the Act by holding th…

CIT v. Tata Steel Ltd. (203 ITR 704) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax