Commissioner of Income Tax-ll v. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti

12 SCC 267Reported decision2012#4781 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax-ll v. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti authority for?

An authority's activities do not lose their charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity, provided the predominant object is to carry out a charitable purpose and not to earn profit. Surplus funds generated are to be used for the established charitable objects.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Commissioner of Income Tax-ll v. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti · charitable purpose · predominant object · profit arising · Section 12-A · Mandi Samities · charitable character

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax-ll v. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti

Varanasi Development Authority, Varanasee vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 267/ALLD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…levy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which MandiSamities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

Varanasi Development Authority, Varanasee vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 266/ALLD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…levy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which MandiSamities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

M/S. Varanasi Development Authority, Varanasi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Varanasi

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 265/ALLD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…levy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which MandiSamities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

M/S. Varanasi Development Authority, Varanasi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Varanasi

In the result appeal filed by assessee in ITA no

ITA 264/ALLD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi06 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: ShriAshishBansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriSunil Bajpai, CIT- D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…levy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which MandiSamities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

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)

…evy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Page 61 of 86 (UP AWAS EV…

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)

…evy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Page 61 of 86 (UP AWAS EV…

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)

…evy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Page 61 of 86 (UP AWAS EV…

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)

…AS PARISHAD) Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

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)

…AS PARISHAD) Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

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)

…AS PARISHAD) Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

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)

…AS PARISHAD) Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

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)

…AS PARISHAD) Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

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)

…AS PARISHAD) Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

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)

…AS PARISHAD) Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

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)

…AS PARISHAD) Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow vs. DCIT (E), Lucknow

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 666/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

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

Section 11Section 12Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 2(15)Section 40

…evy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not I.T.A. Nos.656, 665 & 666/Lkw/2019 23 Assessment year:2012-13 lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v.…

Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow vs. DCIT (E), Lucknow

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 665/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

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

Section 11Section 12Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 2(15)Section 40

…evy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not I.T.A. Nos.656, 665 & 666/Lkw/2019 23 Assessment year:2012-13 lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v.…

Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow vs. DCIT (E), Lucknow

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 656/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

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

Section 11Section 12Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 2(15)Section 40

…evy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not I.T.A. Nos.656, 665 & 666/Lkw/2019 23 Assessment year:2012-13 lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v.…

Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow vs. DCIT (E), Lucknow

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 439/LKW/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

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

Section 11Section 11rSection 12Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…evy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow vs. ACIT (E), Lucknow

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 186/LKW/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

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

Section 11Section 11rSection 12Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…evy/cess/fee. Whatever surplus remains in market fund would come back for carrying on the object for which Mandi Samities are established. 10.2 The aforesaid judgement of High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Appeal reported in (2012) 12 SCC 267. If the predominant object is to carry out charitable purpose and not to earn profit, the purpose would not lose its charitable character merely because some profit arises from the activity [CIT v. Andhra Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 1 (SC), Thiagrajan Charities v. Addl. CIT (1997) 225 ITR 1010 (SC), Girijan Co-operative Corpo…

Commissioner of Income Tax-ll v. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti (12 SCC 267) — Cited in 24 Judgments | BharatTax