Delhi Stock Exchange Association Limited v. CIT

41 ITR 495Supreme Court of India1961#2782 most cited
43

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12Section 12AASection 13Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Issues it is cited on

application of income for charitable purposessection 5(b)real income theorysection 80p(1)section 269tsection 269ssection 269sssection 11(1)application of incomesection 273bsection 271dsection 269

Judgments citing Delhi Stock Exchange Association Limited v. CIT

COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-1(3) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2012-

ITA 955/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…Per contra, the ld AR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and placed reliance on the following decisions: – a. CIT Vs. The Calcutta Stock Exchange Association ltd reported in 36 ITR 222 (Cal) b. Delhi Stock Exchange Association Vs. CIT reported in 41 ITR 495 (Del) c CIT Vs. United Club reported 161 ITR 853(Pat) 8. In all these aforesaid cases, the entrance fee/ one-time membership fee received from the new members were treated as revenue receipt. The ld DR also placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Light Mission reported in 278 ITR 659 (Del)…

COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD-1(3) , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2012-

ITA 952/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…Per contra, the ld AR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and placed reliance on the following decisions: – a. CIT Vs. The Calcutta Stock Exchange Association ltd reported in 36 ITR 222 (Cal) b. Delhi Stock Exchange Association Vs. CIT reported in 41 ITR 495 (Del) c CIT Vs. United Club reported 161 ITR 853(Pat) 8. In all these aforesaid cases, the entrance fee/ one-time membership fee received from the new members were treated as revenue receipt. The ld DR also placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Light Mission reported in 278 ITR 659 (Del)…

SUBODH GUPTA,DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2012-

ITA 955/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…Per contra, the ld AR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and placed reliance on the following decisions: – a. CIT Vs. The Calcutta Stock Exchange Association ltd reported in 36 ITR 222 (Cal) b. Delhi Stock Exchange Association Vs. CIT reported in 41 ITR 495 (Del) c CIT Vs. United Club reported 161 ITR 853(Pat) 8. In all these aforesaid cases, the entrance fee/ one-time membership fee received from the new members were treated as revenue receipt. The ld DR also placed reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Divine Light Mission reported in 278 ITR 659 (Del)…

ARUP BANERJI,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 80/ALLD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad29 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2014-15 Arup Banerji, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of 14/18, Elgin Road, Allahabad Income Tax, Circle-1, Allahabad Pan:Acupb7330A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. S.K. Jaiswal, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.11.2024 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dismissing His Appeal Against The Order Of The Dcit, Circle-1, Allahabad Passed On 30.12.2016. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Because The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Holding That Appellant Does Not Want To Pursue The Appeal & Dismissing Appeal Ex- Party Without Affording An Adequate & Effective Opportunity Of Being Heard. 2. Because The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Not Allowing The Set-Off Of Loss From Derivative Trading Of Rs. 66,05,524/- Brought Forward From Assessment Year 2008-09 Against The Current Year Income Of Rs. 60,19,056/- Earned From Derivative Trading. 3. Because The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Wrongly Conceived The Fact That Appellant Has Brought Forward Loss From Trading In 'Commodity Derivatives' As Per Clause (E) Of Section 43(5) Whereas The Appellant Has Brought Forward Loss From Trading In 'Derivative' As Per Clause

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Jaiswal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 43(5)

…o as to determine taxability and not the way the assessee had shown it in the return of income. For this proposition, the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Stock Exchange Association vs. CIT reported in 41 ITR 495. The ld. AO observed that the assessee had done derivative trading on a regular basis and therefore, such income of the assessee had to be charged under the head business, because it was not income from short term capital gain. Therefore, the question of set off against the brought forward losses of A.Y. 2008-09 did not arise. The ld. AO further f…

ASHWINI SAHAKARI RUNGNALAYA & RESEARCH CENTER,,SOLAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS),, PUNE

ITA 714/PUN/2018[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 714/Pun/2018 Ashwini Sahakari Rugnalaya & Research Centre 7107/1, Plot No. 180, North Sadar Bazar, Solapur-413003. Pan: Aaaja0041K . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Keyur Patel [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 10Section 10(23)Section 11Section 12ASection 22Section 253(1)(c)

…ospective cancellation of registration is no- more res-integra in the light of settled legal position laid in ‘Sinhagad Technical Education Society Vs CIT Central & Ors.’ reported as 343 ITR 23(Bom), ‘Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. Vs CIT’, reported in 225 ITR 235 (SC), ‘Indian Chamber of Commerce Vs CIT’, 101 ITR 796 (SC); ‘Ideal Publications Trust Vs CIT’, 305 ITR 143 (Kerala); ‘CIT Vs National Institute of Aeronautical Engineering Educational Society’, 315 ITR 428 (Uttarakhand); wherein it has been held that, the registering authority who is empowered to grant registration had inherent powers for cancel…

M/S.KARANNUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THE ITO, WD-1(2), KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 249/COCH/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri P. Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjith K. Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271DSection 273BSection 274Section 275(1)(c)Section 80P(1)

…n-members, which may well be asserted as absent in view of the claim for deduction u/s. 80-P for the relevant year extending to the entire business income, is not relevant, but the legal competence to do so (Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 235 (SC)).This, further, brings us to examine if there is a restriction on the area of it’s operations. The assessee is operating with 9 branches in the district of Kozhikode. The restriction on the area of it’s operations, i.e., to village panchayat or a municipality, being applicable only to societies registered after the commencement of the Kerala…

THE KARANNUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD ,KOZHIKKODE vs. THE ITO, WD-1(2),, KOZHIKKODE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 248/COCH/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri P. Raghunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjith K. Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271DSection 273BSection 274Section 275(1)(c)Section 80P(1)

…n-members, which may well be asserted as absent in view of the claim for deduction u/s. 80-P for the relevant year extending to the entire business income, is not relevant, but the legal competence to do so (Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 235 (SC)).This, further, brings us to examine if there is a restriction on the area of it’s operations. The assessee is operating with 9 branches in the district of Kozhikode. The restriction on the area of it’s operations, i.e., to village panchayat or a municipality, being applicable only to societies registered after the commencement of the Kerala…

M/S THE KASARAGOD TODDY TAPPERS AND SHOP WORKERS CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,KASARGOD vs. ITO WARD 1, KASARGOD

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 909/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A(2)(a)Section 5

…3.7 of the assessment order), are to be given primacy, as explained in CIT v. Rajasthan Rajya Bunkar Samithi Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 365 (SC) and, again, in the context of deduction u/s. 80-P(2)(a)(ii)/(vi) (also refer: Delhi Stock Exchange Ass. Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 235 (SC)). Income to the assessee, formed to set-up and run retail toddy shops, arises on the sale of toddy. The economic function of tapping toddy from trees is remunerated by paying wages to the tappers, so that income arising is principally for the functions performed subsequently, of course, to the extent not outsourced. It is this business model…

M/S THE KASARAGOD TODDY TAPPERS AND SHOP WORKERS CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,KASARGOD vs. ITO WARD -1, KASARGOD

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 908/COCH/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A(2)(a)Section 5

…3.7 of the assessment order), are to be given primacy, as explained in CIT v. Rajasthan Rajya Bunkar Samithi Ltd.[2010] 323 ITR 365 (SC) and, again, in the context of deduction u/s. 80-P(2)(a)(ii)/(vi) (also refer: Delhi Stock Exchange Ass. Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 235 (SC)). Income to the assessee, formed to set-up and run retail toddy shops, arises on the sale of toddy. The economic function of tapping toddy from trees is remunerated by paying wages to the tappers, so that income arising is principally for the functions performed subsequently, of course, to the extent not outsourced. It is this business model…

CONFRERE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NOIDA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), NOIDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4464/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 12ASection 250Section 251Section 56

…e purposes. The judgment relied upon by him are as under:- i. CIT-v- Gujarat Maritime Board 295 ITR 561 SC All India Spinners Association-v-CIT 12 ITR 482 PC ii. iii. CIT-v-Andhra Chamber of Commerce 55 ITR 722 SC Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd-v-CIT 225 ITR 235 iv. SC ITA Nos.4464 & 4463/Del/2017 Confrere Educational Society vs. ITO(E) 9 Institute of Chartered Accountants of India-v-DGIT 358 v. ITR 91 (Del) 8. Mr. Singhal submitted that if the interpretation of ld. CIT(A) is accepted, then no educational institution will ever be able to claim exemption which certainly cannot be the intention of the le…

THE KALPETTA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KALPETTA vs. THE ITO, WARD 1, KALPETTA

ITA 852/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Feb 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…n-members, which may well be asserted as absent in view of the claim for deduction u/s. 80-P for the relevant year extending to the entire business income, is not relevant, but the legal competence to do so (Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 235 (SC)). This, further, brings us to examine if there is a restriction on the area of it’s operations. The assessee is operating with 9 branches in the district of Kozhikode. The restriction on the area of it’s operations, i.e., to village panchayat or a municipality, being applicable only to societies registered after the commencement of the Keral…

THE KALPETTA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KALPETTA vs. THE ITO, WARD 1, KALPETTA

ITA 851/COCH/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Feb 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…n-members, which may well be asserted as absent in view of the claim for deduction u/s. 80-P for the relevant year extending to the entire business income, is not relevant, but the legal competence to do so (Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 235 (SC)). This, further, brings us to examine if there is a restriction on the area of it’s operations. The assessee is operating with 9 branches in the district of Kozhikode. The restriction on the area of it’s operations, i.e., to village panchayat or a municipality, being applicable only to societies registered after the commencement of the Keral…

BIOWIN AGRO RESEARCH,MANANTHAWADY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 3/COCH/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Krishna. K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 25Section 8

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 02 & 03/COCH/2022 (Asst. Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Biowin Agro Research, vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, MP 5/587 D, Vemom, Kozhikode Mananthawady, Wayanad. [PAN: AAFCB 6169 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Krishna. K, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 02/02/2023 Date of pronouncement : 24/02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench: This is a set of two Appeals by the Assessee directed against the Order by the Nati…

BIOWIN AGRO RESEARCH,MANANTHAWADY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 2/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Krishna. K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 25Section 8

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 02 & 03/COCH/2022 (Asst. Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Biowin Agro Research, vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, MP 5/587 D, Vemom, Kozhikode Mananthawady, Wayanad. [PAN: AAFCB 6169 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Krishna. K, Advocate Respondent by : Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 02/02/2023 Date of pronouncement : 24/02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench: This is a set of two Appeals by the Assessee directed against the Order by the Nati…

THE SPORTS CLUB OF GUJARAT LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-4, AHMEDABAD

In the result, we are of the view that in light of the discussion above,

ITA 360/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Apr 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2015-16 The Sports Club of Pr. CIT-4, Gujarat Ltd., Sardar Patel Room No. 311, “C” Block, 3rd Floor, Stadium, Navrangpura, Vs Ahmedabad Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, PAN: AAACT7280N Opp. Polytechnic, (Appellant) Ambawadi, Ahmedabad, (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. & Shri Anil R. Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri James Kurian, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 05-04-2022 Date of pronouncement : 28-04-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JU…

M/S VIP GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR

ITA 923/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Ms. Pallavi Joshi (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 68

…s. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 235 : (2000) 243 ITR 89 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bankipur Club Ltd. (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 102 : (1997) 226 ITR 97 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. (1953) 24 ITR 551 (SC) 8. Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. vs. CIT (1961) 41 ITR 495 (SC) 9. CIT vs Talangang Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (2010) 44 DTR (Del) 58 in which it was held that: the bye-laws clearly exposit that it is for the ITA Nos. 923, 677, 678 & 679/JP/2019 9 M/s VIP Group Housing Society, Jaipur & other Vs. ITO, Jaipur development and construction of residential houses, flats for the members to provide the me…

M/S ANIL KUMAR SINGHAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR

ITA 679/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Ms. Pallavi Joshi (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 68

…s. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 235 : (2000) 243 ITR 89 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bankipur Club Ltd. (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 102 : (1997) 226 ITR 97 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. (1953) 24 ITR 551 (SC) 8. Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. vs. CIT (1961) 41 ITR 495 (SC) 9. CIT vs Talangang Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (2010) 44 DTR (Del) 58 in which it was held that: the bye-laws clearly exposit that it is for the ITA Nos. 923, 677, 678 & 679/JP/2019 9 M/s VIP Group Housing Society, Jaipur & other Vs. ITO, Jaipur development and construction of residential houses, flats for the members to provide the me…

M/S TOP STAR GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR

ITA 678/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Ms. Pallavi Joshi (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 68

…s. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 235 : (2000) 243 ITR 89 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bankipur Club Ltd. (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 102 : (1997) 226 ITR 97 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. (1953) 24 ITR 551 (SC) 8. Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. vs. CIT (1961) 41 ITR 495 (SC) 9. CIT vs Talangang Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (2010) 44 DTR (Del) 58 in which it was held that: the bye-laws clearly exposit that it is for the ITA Nos. 923, 677, 678 & 679/JP/2019 9 M/s VIP Group Housing Society, Jaipur & other Vs. ITO, Jaipur development and construction of residential houses, flats for the members to provide the me…

M/S DARSHAN SINGH,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-1, JAIPUR

ITA 677/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Ms. Pallavi Joshi (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 68

…s. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 235 : (2000) 243 ITR 89 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Bankipur Club Ltd. (1997) 140 CTR (SC) 102 : (1997) 226 ITR 97 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Royal Western India Turf Club Ltd. (1953) 24 ITR 551 (SC) 8. Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. vs. CIT (1961) 41 ITR 495 (SC) 9. CIT vs Talangang Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (2010) 44 DTR (Del) 58 in which it was held that: the bye-laws clearly exposit that it is for the ITA Nos. 923, 677, 678 & 679/JP/2019 9 M/s VIP Group Housing Society, Jaipur & other Vs. ITO, Jaipur development and construction of residential houses, flats for the members to provide the me…

LANDBASE INDIA LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-15(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 7271/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms Sushma Chowla, Hon‟Ble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)

…income of the assessee. The learned CIT - A with respect to the entrance fees and membership fees has followed the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Calcutta stock exchange Association Ltd 36 ITR 222 and Delhi stock exchange Association Ltd 41 ITR 495 wherein it has been held that entrance fee/membership fees received from the members is an income. 39. On careful analysis of the order of the learned CIT - A, according to us he has wrongly applied the decision of the Calcutta stock exchange Ltd and Delhi stock exchange Ltd. In Calcutta stock exchange Ltd the issue of the monthly fees received by…

Showing 1–20 of 43 · Page 1 of 3