Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab v. Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10(23EC), Section 11, Section 13(3), Section 13(8), Section 2(15), Section 12A.

Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab v. Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd. (60 ITR 1)

Q: What is Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab v. Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd. authority for?

The mere fact that a company has not gone into liquidation does not establish an intention to continue business, particularly if there is no intention to resume it. The court's conclusion about the closure of business hinges on the absence of an intention to resume operations.

Q: How many judgments cite Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab v. Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd.?

32 judgments on BharatTax cite Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab v. Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd. (60 ITR 1), spanning 2016 to 2025.

DCIT, CIRCLE- 7(1), NEW DELHI vs. DELHI AUTOMOBILES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5945/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Delhi Automobiles Ltd., Circle-7(1), 14-C, Sagar Apartments, New Delhi 6 Tilak Marg, Pin 1100 02 New Delhi Pin: 1100 01 Pan No. Aabcd7933P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Salil Kapoor, SumitFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 68

…f the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court at Delhi, in the case of CIT vs. Anita Jain (supra) observed in para 3 as under:- "3. Ms.Bansal, learned counsel for the revenue, has drawn our attention to the observation in CIT v. Lahore Electric Supply Co.Ltd.[1966] 60 ITR 1(SC)to the effect 5 that the 'mere fact that the company had not gone into liquidation would not establish that it had the intention to do business". This submission loses sight of the observations made at page 5 which clearly indicate that the Court came to the conclusion that the assessee had closed business because it had not 'established an inte…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MULTI COMMODITY EXCHANGE INVESTOR PROTECTION FUND, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3262/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3198/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

…. 1927 Of 2010 dated 19/09/2011, Suart art Silk Mfrs. Association (1979) 121 ITR 1, Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association dated (1983) 140 ITR 1(SC), Sai Publication Fund (2002) 4 SCC 57. H. Abdul Bakhi (1964) 15 STC 664 (SC), Lahore Electric Supply Company (1966) 60 ITR 1(SC).” 4. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee and held that its activities were not charitable. The AO was also of the view that assessee trust was set up as per SEBI/FMC guidelines which was not a voluntary activity. The assessing officer also of the view that activity of the assessee trust was for the benefit of rela…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MULTI COMMODITY EXCHANGE INVESTOR PROTECTION FUND, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3198/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3198/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

…. 1927 Of 2010 dated 19/09/2011, Suart art Silk Mfrs. Association (1979) 121 ITR 1, Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association dated (1983) 140 ITR 1(SC), Sai Publication Fund (2002) 4 SCC 57. H. Abdul Bakhi (1964) 15 STC 664 (SC), Lahore Electric Supply Company (1966) 60 ITR 1(SC).” 4. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee and held that its activities were not charitable. The AO was also of the view that assessee trust was set up as per SEBI/FMC guidelines which was not a voluntary activity. The assessing officer also of the view that activity of the assessee trust was for the benefit of rela…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MULTI COMMODITY EXCHANGE INVESTOR PROTECTION FUND, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3197/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3198/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

…. 1927 Of 2010 dated 19/09/2011, Suart art Silk Mfrs. Association (1979) 121 ITR 1, Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association dated (1983) 140 ITR 1(SC), Sai Publication Fund (2002) 4 SCC 57. H. Abdul Bakhi (1964) 15 STC 664 (SC), Lahore Electric Supply Company (1966) 60 ITR 1(SC).” 4. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee and held that its activities were not charitable. The AO was also of the view that assessee trust was set up as per SEBI/FMC guidelines which was not a voluntary activity. The assessing officer also of the view that activity of the assessee trust was for the benefit of rela…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. MULTI COMMODITY EXCHANGE INVESTOR PROTECTION FUND, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3195/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleita No. 3198/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

…. 1927 Of 2010 dated 19/09/2011, Suart art Silk Mfrs. Association (1979) 121 ITR 1, Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association dated (1983) 140 ITR 1(SC), Sai Publication Fund (2002) 4 SCC 57. H. Abdul Bakhi (1964) 15 STC 664 (SC), Lahore Electric Supply Company (1966) 60 ITR 1(SC).” 4. However, the AO has not agreed with the submission of the assessee and held that its activities were not charitable. The AO was also of the view that assessee trust was set up as per SEBI/FMC guidelines which was not a voluntary activity. The assessing officer also of the view that activity of the assessee trust was for the benefit of rela…

ITO - 4(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. M. W. CORP. PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is fully dismissed

ITA 6689/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalito-4(2)(4), Room No. 647, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020. ...... Appellant Vs. M/S M.W.Corp. Pvt. Ltd. 99, Niranjan, Marine Drive, Marine Lines, Mumbai-400002. Pan: Aafcm1365G ..... Respondent Appellant By : Smt. Mahita Nair- Cit(Dr) Respondent By : None Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/10/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As [‘Cit(A)’] Dated 14.09.2017 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As [‘The Act’] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Smt. Mahita Nair- CIT(DR)For Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 56

…ts and coordinate benches of ITAT as under: i. Western express Industries Ltd vs ACIT (ITA NO 3013/M/2012) ii. CIT Vs Rajendra Prasad Moody 115 ITR 519(S.C). iii. Daljit Exports (India) Pvt Ltd Vs ITO 36 ITD 0305. iv. CIT. Vs Lohore Electricity Supply Co Ltd [60 ITR 1(S.C)] v. L.Ve. Vairavan Chettiar Vs CIT (Mad) 72 ITR 0114. 10. As observed supra this is not the first year of operation of the assessee and previous years results were also assessed under scrutiny and assessee declared income under the head business and profession. Accordingly, it doesn’t require the presence of the receipt from operation on the cr…

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)

…ofit motive, the activity being manual or mercantile, as distinguished from the liberal arts or learned professions or agriculture." 9.9 Similarly, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab v. Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd (1966)60 ITR 1 (S.C) has held as under: Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. “Income Tax business Income-Carrying On of Business - Government Acquired Assessee Company's Undertaking In Regard To Supply Of Electricity-Mere fact That It Did Not Go Into Liquidation Would Not Establ…

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)

…ofit motive, the activity being manual or mercantile, as distinguished from the liberal arts or learned professions or agriculture." 9.9 Similarly, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab v. Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd (1966)60 ITR 1 (S.C) has held as under: Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. “Income Tax business Income-Carrying On of Business - Government Acquired Assessee Company's Undertaking In Regard To Supply Of Electricity-Mere fact That It Did Not Go Into Liquidation Would Not Establ…

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)

…ofit motive, the activity being manual or mercantile, as distinguished from the liberal arts or learned professions or agriculture." 9.9 Similarly, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab v. Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd (1966)60 ITR 1 (S.C) has held as under: Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. “Income Tax business Income-Carrying On of Business - Government Acquired Assessee Company's Undertaking In Regard To Supply Of Electricity-Mere fact That It Did Not Go Into Liquidation Would Not Establ…

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)

…ofit motive, the activity being manual or mercantile, as distinguished from the liberal arts or learned professions or agriculture." 9.9 Similarly, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab v. Lahore Electric Supply Co. Ltd (1966)60 ITR 1 (S.C) has held as under: Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. M/s. Varanasi Development Authority v. ACIT,Circle-3, Varanasi,U.P. “Income Tax business Income-Carrying On of Business - Government Acquired Assessee Company's Undertaking In Regard To Supply Of Electricity-Mere fact That It Did Not Go Into Liquidation Would Not Establ…

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