Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sai Publication Fund

258 ITR 70Supreme Court of India2002#1832 most cited

What is Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sai Publication Fund authority for?

If a charitable organization's dominant activity is not business, then any incidental or ancillary activity performed to achieve its main object will also not be considered 'business,' even if it generates income, provided the primary activity is not driven by a profit intent.

62

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sai Publication Fund · Sai Publication Fund · charitable trust business · dominant activity · incidental activity · ancillary activity · not business · profit intent · section 2(13) · section 2(15) proviso · charitable purpose

Issues it is cited on

section 4(3)mutuality principlesection 205section 2(13)advancement of general public utilitysection 36(1)(v)section 10(23c)(iv)section 13(8)section 11(4a)section 11(6)section 2(11)proviso to section 2(15)

Judgments citing Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sai Publication Fund

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1123/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

…and “adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce and manufacture”. The term “business” has been explained by various judicial decisions and the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CST v. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 interpreted the word ‘business’ under section 2(5-A) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as follows:- “… No doubt, the definition of “business” given in Section 2(5-A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade commerce or manufacture and any t…

SHREE RAJPUT SABHA,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

ITA 311/JPR/2020[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2024AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80GSection 80G(5)(vi)

…tant increase into surplus is considered, this necessity gives impression of commercial activity. Let us appreciate the facts in light of various judicial pronouncement. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Sale Tax vs Sai Publication Fund 258 ITR 70(SC) has held: "There is no dispute that the primary and dominant activity of the trust is to spread the message of Saibaba. This main activity does not amount to "business", The activity of publishing and selling literature, books and other literature is obviously incidental or ancillary to the main activity of spreading the message of Saibaba and…

M/S INNOVTIVE MICROFINANCE FOR POVERTY ALLEVIATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT(EXEMPTIONS),CHENNAI CIRCLE, CHENNAI

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

ITA 164/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Swaroop, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…rofits are generated continuously and throughout the years. 6.15 Further, in our opinion, the dominant activity should not be in the nature of business: The Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sai Publication Fund (2002) 258 ITR 70 (SC) held that: "Thus, if the dominant activity of the assessee was not business, then any incidental or ancillary activity would also not fall within the definition of business." 6.16 The above ruling again re-affirms the law that a charitable organization cannot be allowed to run its primary activity on commercial principles with profit intent…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(3), EXEMPTION , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 499/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…and “adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce and manufacture”. The term “business” has been explained by various judicial decisions and the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CST v. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 interpreted the word ‘business’ under section 2(5-A) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as follows:- “… No doubt, the definition of “business” given in Section 2(5-A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade commerce or manufacture and any t…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIA FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3),EXEMPT, KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1230/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…and “adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce and manufacture”. The term “business” has been explained by various judicial decisions and the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CST v. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 interpreted the word ‘business’ under section 2(5- A) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as follows:- 10 I.T.A. Nos.1228,1229 & 1230/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Institute of Indian Foundrymen “… No doubt, the definition of “business” given in Section 2(5-A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to incl…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1229/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…and “adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce and manufacture”. The term “business” has been explained by various judicial decisions and the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CST v. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 interpreted the word ‘business’ under section 2(5- A) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as follows:- 10 I.T.A. Nos.1228,1229 & 1230/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Institute of Indian Foundrymen “… No doubt, the definition of “business” given in Section 2(5-A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to incl…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1228/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…and “adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce and manufacture”. The term “business” has been explained by various judicial decisions and the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CST v. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 interpreted the word ‘business’ under section 2(5- A) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as follows:- 10 I.T.A. Nos.1228,1229 & 1230/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 The Institute of Indian Foundrymen “… No doubt, the definition of “business” given in Section 2(5-A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to incl…

THE INSTITUTE OF INDIAN FOUNDRYMEN,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 906/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…iness” has been explained by various judicial 10 I.T.A. No. 906/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15 The Institute of Indian Foundrymen decisions and the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CST v. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 interpreted the word ‘business’ under section 2(5- A) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as follows:- “… No doubt, the definition of “business” given in Section 2(5-A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade commerce or manufacture and any…

SANGHAMITRA RURAL FINANCIAL SERVICES,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

ITA 745/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

Section 11Section 2(15)Section 234ASection 8

…rofits are generated continuously and throughout the years. 6.15 Further, in our opinion, the dominant activity should not be in the nature of business: The Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sai Publication Fund (2002) 258 ITR 70 (SC) held that: "Thus, if the dominant activity of the assessee was not business, then any incidental or ancillary activity would also not fall within the definition of business." 6.16 The above ruling again re-affirms the law that a charitable organization cannot be allowed to run its primary activity on commercial principles with profit intent.…

SANGHAMITRA RURAL FINANCIAL SERVICES,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 744/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 11Section 2(15)Section 234ASection 8

…ofits are generated continuously and throughout the years. 6.15 Further, in our opinion, the dominant activity should not be in the nature of business: The Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sai Publication Fund (2002) 258 ITR 70 (SC) held that: "Thus, if the dominant activity of the assessee was not business, then any incidental or ancillary activity would also not fall within the definition of business." 6.16 The above ruling again re-affirms the law that a charitable organization cannot be allowed to run its primary activity on commercial principles with profit intent…

INDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-1(1), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 934/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpalyadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

…as been explained by various judicial decisions and the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India 21 I.T.A. Nos.933 & 934/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Indian Chamber of Commerce in the case of CST v. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 interpreted the word ‘business’ under section 2(5-A) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as follows:- “… No doubt, the definition of “business” given in Section 2(5-A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade commerce or manufacture and any…

INDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-1(1), (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 933/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpalyadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

…as been explained by various judicial decisions and the landmark decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India 21 I.T.A. Nos.933 & 934/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Indian Chamber of Commerce in the case of CST v. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 interpreted the word ‘business’ under section 2(5-A) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 as follows:- “… No doubt, the definition of “business” given in Section 2(5-A) of the Act even without profit motive is wide enough to include any trade, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade commerce or manufacture and any…

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 68/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…tant increase into surplus is considered, this necessity gives impression of commercial activity. Let us appreciate the facts in light of various judicial pronouncement. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Sale Tax vs Sai Publication Fund 258 ITR 70(SC) has held: “There is no dispute that the primary and dominant activity of the trust is to spread the message of Saibaba. This main activity does not amount to “business”. The activity of publishing and selling literature, books and other literature is obviously incidental or ancillary to the main activity of spreading the message of Saibaba an…

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION),WARD, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 67/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…tant increase into surplus is considered, this necessity gives impression of commercial activity. Let us appreciate the facts in light of various judicial pronouncement. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Sale Tax vs Sai Publication Fund 258 ITR 70(SC) has held: “There is no dispute that the primary and dominant activity of the trust is to spread the message of Saibaba. This main activity does not amount to “business”. The activity of publishing and selling literature, books and other literature is obviously incidental or ancillary to the main activity of spreading the message of Saibaba an…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 66/JPR/2022[2005]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…tant increase into surplus is considered, this necessity gives impression of commercial activity. Let us appreciate the facts in light of various judicial pronouncement. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Sale Tax vs Sai Publication Fund 258 ITR 70(SC) has held: “There is no dispute that the primary and dominant activity of the trust is to spread the message of Saibaba. This main activity does not amount to “business”. The activity of publishing and selling literature, books and other literature is obviously incidental or ancillary to the main activity of spreading the message of Saibaba an…

M/S. DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA,MANGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE -1, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 948/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…s (Pathak, J.) in Dharmadeepti v. CIT (supra), must be "essentially charitable in nature" and it must not be a cover for carrying on an activity which has profit making as its predominant object.” ∗ In Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 (SC), it was held as follows: 10. …………. From the facts of the present case, the sole object of the assessee-trust is to spread the message of Saibaba of Shirdi. It is also not disputed that the books and literature, etc., containing the message of Saibaba were distributed by the trust to the devotees of Saibaba at cost price. There is no dispute…

M/S. UDUPI NIRMITHI KEDRA,UDUPI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE - 1, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 947/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…s (Pathak, J.) in Dharmadeepti v. CIT (supra), must be "essentially charitable in nature" and it must not be a cover for carrying on an activity which has profit making as its predominant object.” ∗ In Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 (SC), it was held as follows: 10. …………. From the facts of the present case, the sole object of the assessee-trust is to spread the message of Saibaba of Shirdi. It is also not disputed that the books and literature, etc., containing the message of Saibaba were distributed by the trust to the devotees of Saibaba at cost price. There is no dispute…

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1,, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2089/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…s (Pathak, J.) in Dharmadeepti v. CIT (supra), must be "essentially charitable in nature" and it must not be a cover for carrying on an activity which has profit making as its predominant object.” ∗ In Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 (SC), it was held as follows: 10. …………. From the facts of the present case, the sole object of the assessee-trust is to spread the message of Saibaba of Shirdi. It is also not disputed that the books and literature, etc., containing the message of Saibaba were distributed by the trust to the devotees of Saibaba at cost price. There is no dispute…

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1),, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2088/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…s (Pathak, J.) in Dharmadeepti v. CIT (supra), must be "essentially charitable in nature" and it must not be a cover for carrying on an activity which has profit making as its predominant object.” ∗ In Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 (SC), it was held as follows: 10. …………. From the facts of the present case, the sole object of the assessee-trust is to spread the message of Saibaba of Shirdi. It is also not disputed that the books and literature, etc., containing the message of Saibaba were distributed by the trust to the devotees of Saibaba at cost price. There is no dispute…

DAKSHINA KANNADA NIRMITHI KENDRA ,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1),, MANGALURU

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessees in all the assessees’ appeals are dismissed except for assessment year

ITA 2087/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R
Section 11Section 143(2)Section 2Section 2(15)

…s (Pathak, J.) in Dharmadeepti v. CIT (supra), must be "essentially charitable in nature" and it must not be a cover for carrying on an activity which has profit making as its predominant object.” ∗ In Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. Sai Publication Fund [2002] 258 ITR 70 (SC), it was held as follows: 10. …………. From the facts of the present case, the sole object of the assessee-trust is to spread the message of Saibaba of Shirdi. It is also not disputed that the books and literature, etc., containing the message of Saibaba were distributed by the trust to the devotees of Saibaba at cost price. There is no dispute…

Showing 1–20 of 62 · Page 1 of 4

Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sai Publication Fund (258 ITR 70) — Cited in 62 Judgments | BharatTax