Cricket Association of Bengal v. CIT

37 ITR 277High Court1959#5610 most cited

What is Cricket Association of Bengal v. CIT authority for?

An entity's activities are not considered for a charitable purpose if they primarily involve commercial exploitation, even if conducted with business principles. Such commercial activities can lead to the denial of exemptions.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Cricket Association of Bengal v CIT · 37 ITR 277 · charitable purpose · commercial exploitation · exemption denied · business principles · Section 2(15) · Section 11

Judgments citing Cricket Association of Bengal v. CIT

M/S. Gujarat Cricket Association, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Exemptions, Circle-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2589/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh&Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2589/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15) M/S. Gujarat Cricket Dcit, बनाम/ Exemptions, Circle-1, Association Vs. Ahmedabad Iind Floor, Akshar Arcade, Opp. Memnagar Fire Station, Nr. Vijay Char Rasta, Ahmedabad- 380015 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaa Ag1 205 C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Aparna Agarwal, CIT DRFor Respondent: 20/03/2019
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)Section 13(8)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 2(24)Section 234Section 80G(5)

…dated 24.9.1984 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. 2.2 The, promotion and development of game of cricket is recognised as a charitable purpose falling under the fourth limb of section 2(15). The decision of Cricket Association of Bengal v CIT (1959) 37 ITR 277 (Cal) and Baroda Cricket Associationv ITO (2006) 8 SOT 735 (Ahd) buttress this proposition. 3. Whether the Assessee is covered within the first proviso to section 2(15)? 5 ITA No. 2589/AHD/2017 A.Y. 2014-15 3.1 The dispute is whether the Assessee is covered within the, gamut of first proviso to section 2(15) which reads as under: "Provided tha…