Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club

110 ITR 392High Court1977#8134 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club authority for?

An institution registered under section 12A is presumed to be established for charitable purposes. The Assessing Officer cannot question the charitable nature of the objects until the registration is cancelled.

13

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club · 110 ITR 392 · section 12A · section 12AA · charitable purpose · registration · exemption · Assessing Officer · Commissioner

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12AA

Issues it is cited on

corpus fundcorpus donationsection 12aasection 12asection 12section 11india

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club

Shree Jagat Guru Brahmanand Gaushala Samiti, Panipat vs. CIT(E), Chandigarh

ITA 297/DEL/2022[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2025

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12A

…reported in 246 ITR 532 (Madras) [2001]: (B) CIT vs. Red Rose School reported in 212 CTR (All) 394; (C) M. Visvesvaraya Industrial Research & Development Centre vs. ITAT reported in 251 ITR 852 (Mumbai) [2001]: (D) CIT vs. Otacamund Gymkhana Club reported in 110 ITR 392 (Madras) [1977] and (E) Gouri Shankar Deity vs. Union of India 145 ITR 67 (MP) [1984]. Before the period of grant of registration, all voluntary contributions (including the ones with specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus) are the income of a charitable, religious or charitable cum religious trust. Therefore, in the present c…

Yadav Kalyan Samiti, Faridabad vs. CIT Exmptions Chandigarh, Chandigarh

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2052/DEL/2021[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Delhi30 Aug 2023AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…reported in 246 ITR 532 (Madras) [2001]; (B) CIT vs. Red Rose School reported in 212 CTR (All) 394; (C) M. Visvesvaraya Industrial Research & Development Centre vs. ITAT reported in 251 ITR 852 (Mumbai) [ 2001]; (D) CIT vs. Otacamund Gymkhana Club reported in 110 ITR 392 (Madras) [1977] and (E) Gouri Shankar Deity vs. Union of India 145 ITR 67 (MP) [1984], 4 Before the period of grant of registration, all voluntary contributions (including the ones with specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus) are the income of a charitable, religious or charitable cum religious trust. Therefore, in the presen…

Bhag Kaur and Harnam Singh Zoria, Dasuya vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Exemptions), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 16/ASR/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar01 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12A

…reported in 246 ITR 532 (Madras) [2001 ];(B) CIT vs. Red Rose School reported in 212 Cl'R (All) 394;(C) M. Visvesvaraya Industrial Research & Development Centre vs. ITAT reported in 251 ITR 852 (Mumbai) [ 2001];(D) CIT vs. Otacamund Gymkhana Club reported in 110 ITR 392 (Madras) [1977] and(E) Gouri Shankar Deity vs. Union of India 145 ITR 67 (MP) [1984]. Before the period of grant of registration, all voluntary contributions (including the ones with specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus) are the income of a charitable, religious or charitable cum religious trust. Therefore, in the present ca…

Lions Club Sonipat Charitable Trust, Sonipat vs. CIT(E), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 511/DEL/2021[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmalions Club Sonipat Charitable Commissioner Of Income Tax Trust, (Exemption), 5Th Floor, C.R. Building, Himalaya 231 Model Town, Vs Sonipat, Marg, Sector-17-E, Haryana-1310001 Chandigarh-160017 Pan-Aabtl8304M Assessee Revenue

Section 11Section 12A

…eported in 246 ITR'532- (Madras) [2001]; (B) CIT vs. Red Rose School reported in 212 CTR (All) 394; (C) M. Visvesvaraya Industrial Research & Development Centre vs. ITAT reported in 251 ITR 852 (Mumbai) [ 2001]; (D) CIT vs. Otacamund Gymkhana Club reported in 110 ITR 392 (Madras) [1977] and (E) Gouri Shankar Deity vs. Union of India 145 ITR 67 (MP) [1984], Before the period of grant of registration, all voluntary contributions (including the ones with specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus) are the income of a charitable, religious or charitable cum religious trust. Therefore, in the present c…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maharaji Education Trust, Ghaziabad

The appeal are dismissed

ITA 5138/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, C. AFor Respondent: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas[CIT]–
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

…and Charitable Society Vs. CIT (2005) 278 ITR 262 have held that "Registration of an Institution u/s 12A is sufficient proof of it being established for charitable purpose." Similar view has been affirmed in the decisions of CIT Vs. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club 110 ITR 392 (Mad.), Madhya Pradesh Madhyan Vs. CIT 256 ITR 277 (MP) and Hiralal Bhagwati Vs. CIT ) 246 ITR 188, 193 (Guj.) approved by Apex Court in above decision and Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority, 2017 396 ITR 323 (Gujarat). The power of such cancellation is vested only with the Commissioner and not with the AO. The AO cannot determine that the obj…

Asstt. CIT (E)-1(1), Mumbai vs. All India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai

In the result, we hereby set-aside the order of CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the benefit of Sec

ITA 2108/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBERAND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.2108/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2015–16) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant (Exemp.), Circle–1(1), Mumbai v/s All India Rubber Industries Association 601–B, Pramukh Plaza Cardinal Gracious Road ……………. Respondent Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 099 PAN – AAACA7076R Assessee by : Ms. Aarti Vissanji Revenue by : Shri Michael Jerald Date of Hearing – 10.09.2020 Date of Order – 17.09.2020 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. Captioned appeal has been filed by the…

Confederation of Indian Textile Industry, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, we hereby set-aside the order of CIT(A) and the Assessing

ITA 2435/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Confederation Of Indian Vs. Ito(E)(1)(2), Mumbai Textile Industry 1508, Maker Chamber V-221 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No.Aaact0174H (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 25

…a Gymkhana Club formed to promote physical fitness, sports and games and social intercourse amongst the members has been held entitled to the exemption under Section 11 by the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club (1977) 110 ITR 392; an association formed for the general benefit of the members of the legal profession was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bar Council of Maharashtra, (1981) 130 ITR 28; a public utility undertaking such as a State Road Transport Corporation was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Co…

All India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (E)1(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 247/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 23Section 4Section 44A

…a Gymkhana Club formed to promote physical fitness, sports and games and social intercourse amongst the members has been held entitled to the exemption under Section 11 by the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club (1977) 110 ITR 392; an association formed for the general benefit of the members of the legal profession was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bar Council of Maharashtra, (1981) 130 ITR 28; a public utility undertaking such as a State Road Transport Corporation was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Co…

All India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai vs. ADIT (E) II(2), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3994/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 23Section 4Section 44A

…a Gymkhana Club formed to promote physical fitness, sports and games and social intercourse amongst the members has been held entitled to the exemption under Section 11 by the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club (1977) 110 ITR 392; an association formed for the general benefit of the members of the legal profession was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bar Council of Maharashtra, (1981) 130 ITR 28; a public utility undertaking such as a State Road Transport Corporation was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Co…

All India Rubber Industries Association, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1368/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 23Section 4Section 44A

…a Gymkhana Club formed to promote physical fitness, sports and games and social intercourse amongst the members has been held entitled to the exemption under Section 11 by the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club (1977) 110 ITR 392; an association formed for the general benefit of the members of the legal profession was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bar Council of Maharashtra, (1981) 130 ITR 28; a public utility undertaking such as a State Road Transport Corporation was held eligible for the exemption by the Supreme Co…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Dlf Qutab Enclave Complex Educational Charitable Trust, New Delhi

ITA 5253/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CA &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jiwani, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 12BSection 143(3)

…78 ITR 262 have held that "Registration of an Institution u/s 12A is sufficient proof of it being established for charitable purpose." Similar view has been earlier affirmed in the following judicial decisions too: (a) CIT Vs. Ootacamund Gymkhana Club (1977) 110 ITR 392 (Mad.) (b) Hiralal Bhagwati Vs. CIT (2000) 246 ITR 188, 193 (Guj.) (c) Addl. CIT Vs. Surat City Gymkhanna [SLP (C) Nos. 20439-440 of 2001: (2002) 257 ITR (St.) 34 (SC)] (d) Madhya Pradesh Madhyam Vs. ClT (2002) 256 ITR 277, 279 (MP) Therefore, following my own decision rendered, for the AY 2011- 12 and that of AY 2009-10 duly upheld by ITAT, t…

Phd Chamber of Commerce & Industry vs. Director of Income Tax - Exemptions

ITA/369/2012HC Delhi19 Oct 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12A

…3 r * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on : 30^'^ August 2012. % Date of Decision : 19^'^ October, 2012. + ITANO.368-369/2012 PHD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY I .... Appellant Thi-QUgh: Mr.C.S.Aggarwal, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Prkash Kumai', Advocate. VERSUS DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX-EXEMPTIONS Respondent Through: Mr.Anupam Tripdtlii, Sr. Standing Counsel with J Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocate CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BEAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J.: These two appeals filed by the aSsessee pertain to the assessment years 2006- . 07 and 2007-08. The assessee is the PFID Chambers…

Phd Chamber of Commerce & Industry vs. Director of Income Tax -Exemptions

ITA/368/2012HC Delhi19 Oct 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12A

…3 r * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on : 30^'^ August 2012. % Date of Decision : 19^'^ October, 2012. + ITANO.368-369/2012 PHD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY I .... Appellant Thi-QUgh: Mr.C.S.Aggarwal, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Prkash Kumai', Advocate. VERSUS DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX-EXEMPTIONS Respondent Through: Mr.Anupam Tripdtlii, Sr. Standing Counsel with J Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocate CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BEAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J.: These two appeals filed by the aSsessee pertain to the assessment years 2006- . 07 and 2007-08. The assessee is the PFID Chambers…