Dharamaposhan Co. v. CIT

114 ITR 463Supreme Court of India1978#18746 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2020.

Judgments citing Dharamaposhan Co. v. CIT

M/S.Bharathakshemam, Thrissur vs. The ITO, Thrissur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 590/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(bb)Section 2(15)

…he facts in the latter decision were not raised before him. The decision in Dharmodayam (1974) 94 ITR 113 (Ker) was followed by the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ashoka Charities (1987) 163 ITR 579. In the case of Dharmaposhanam Co. vs. CIT (1978) 114 ITR 463 wherein one of the objects of the assessee-company, registered under section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956 was to do the needful for the promotion of charity, education, industries, etc., and public good, the Supreme Court observed that the operation of an industry ordinarily envisages a profit making activity and so far as the advancement of…

ACIT (Exemptions), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Peoples Forum, Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and cross objections filed

ITA 325/CTK/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 Jan 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year :2009-2010 Acit (Exemptions), Aayakar Vs. M/S. Peoples Forum, Plot Bhavan, Bhubaneswar. No.Hig 44, Dharma Vihar, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. Aaatp 2214 R (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 288A

…R 796 (SC)]. v) The establishment of an industrial or commercial concern ordinarily envisages a profit making activity and cannot be said to be a charitable purpose on the ground that it will provide employment to some poor persons [Dharmaposhanam Co. [1978] 114 ITR 463 (SC); Jaipur Charitable Trust [1971] 81 ITR 1 (Del); Yogiraj Charity Trust [1976] 103 ITR 777 (SC)]. (vi) To serve a charitable purpose, it is not necessary that the object should be to benefit the whole of mankind] or all persons in a particular country or state. It is sufficient if the intention to benefit a section of the public as distinguis…

M/S. Hero'S Education and Welfare Society, Bhopal vs. The ACIT 3(1), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 232/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 68

….No. 232/Ind/2015-A.Y.2010-11 M/S.HERO’S EDUCATION & WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL. Page 10 of 29 could be distributed by way of dividends. Distribution of profits, is a very different thing from having other charitable objects. In the case of Dharmaposhanam Co., 114 ITR 463 ( S. C.), the Trust was partly a charitable trust and partly for profit purposes. It was doing certain business like manufacturing of kuris and money lending as a commercial activities. It was, therefore, held that such objects are not charitable purposes but for the purpose of profit. In the present case, the other objects are also charitab…

Rahee Foundation, Mumbai vs. DIT (E), Mumbai

In the result appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2913/MUM/2013[]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2016

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 2(15)

…ctivities also, which will defeat the very purpose of granting registration. Hence, it has to be held that assessee’s activities are not solely for the charitable purposes. In support, he relied upon the following decisions:- i) Dharamaposhan Co. v CIT [1978] 114 ITR 463 (SC): “Where it observed that as the trust has both charitable purpose and it is open to the Appellant in its discretion to apply the income derived to any of the business. Hence it was held that it does not fall under the definition of ‘charitable purpose’ u/s 2(15)”. ii) Sole Trustee Loka Shikshan Trust vs CIT (1976 AIR 10): “Where the Court cl…