How many judgments cite GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption)?

51 judgments on BharatTax cite GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption) (360 ITR 138), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption) come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11, Section 11(1)(d), Section 11(5), Section 12A, Section 13(1)(c)(ii), Section 13(3).

GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption)

360 ITR 138High Court2014#2247 most cited

What is GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption) authority for?

Charging fees, even when having regard to the economic status of beneficiaries, is permissible for the sustenance of charitable activities, provided it is necessary for operation and running expenses and does not amount to carrying on trade or commerce. This applies even after the introduction of the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption) · 360 ITR 138 · section 2(15) · proviso to section 2(15) · charitable activities · trade or commerce · fees for sustenance · economic status of beneficiaries · profit motive · advancement of general public utility

Sections most often in play

Section 11 Section 11(1)(d)Section 11(5)Section 12A Section 13(1)(c)(ii)Section 13(3)Section 2(15)

Issues it is cited on

section 4(3)section 205 section 10(23c)(iv)section 36(1)(v)advancement of general public utility section 52 proviso to section 2(15)mli section 2(15)section 10(23c)put to use section 40a(3)

Judgments citing GSI India v. DGIT (Exemption)

ITO, New Delhi vs. Consultancy Development Centre, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2173/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishiito(E) Consultancy Development Centre, Trust Ward-Iii, Room No.2419, 24Th Iind Floor, Zone Ivb, Lodhi Road, Vs. Floor, E-2, Block, Pratyaksh Kar India Habitat Centre, New Delhi Bhawan, Civi Centre, Jawahar Lal Pan:Aaatc4020A Nehru Marg, New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. SD Kapila, Adv

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

…re us. The ld DR relied upon the order of the ld Assessing Officer whereas the ld AR 4. relied upon the order of the ld CIT(A) and further submitted that the issue is further covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in 360 ITR 138 and 358 ITR 78. He further submitted a chart of comparable of those decisions with the facts involved in the present case. 5. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and also perused the order of lower authorities. The ld DR could not controvert the fact that the issue is not covered by the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case…

Credit Gurantee Fund Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 6282/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amit Shuklacredit Guarantee Fund Trust For Micro & Small Enterprises, 7Th Floor, Sme Development Centre, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra(E), Mumbai 400 051 Pan:Aaatc 2613D ...... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Pirmal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai 400 012 .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Shri Prawin Kumar

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

…of the Act by Finance Act, 2008 with effect from 01/04/2009:- (i) PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry vs. DIT(E), 357 ITR 296. (ii)Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Another v. DGI(E) And Other, 358 ITR 91(Del) 15 (iii) GSI India v. DGIT(E), 360 ITR 138(Del) (iv) India Trade Promotion Organization vs. DGIT(E) & Others, 371 ITR 333 (Del) 5.6 We have carefully considered the rival submissions. Before we proceed to address the controversy relating to invoking of the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act, we may briefly recapitulate the fact-situation. As noted earlier, the main object and purpose o…

M/S. Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority, Dehradun vs. CIT, Dehradun

In the result we dismiss the appeal of the assessee

ITA 180/DEL/2013[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2017

Bench: Shri S.K. Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year:

For Appellant: Sh. Mahesh B. Chhibber, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vijay Varma, CIT DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…commerce”. Hon‟ble Delhi high court has occasion to consider the meaning of this in its decision GSI India v. Director General Musssoorie Dehradun Development Authority V CIT, Dehradun ITA No 180/Del/2013 Page 23 of 30 of Income-Tax (exemption) and another, 360 ITR 138, wherein it held as under:- “Scope of "trade, commerce or business" 16. The key words, namely ; trade, commerce and business were enumerate and elucidate in Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Director- General of Income-tax (Exemptions) [2012] 347 ITR 99 (Delhi) as under (page 113) : "Trade, as per the Webster's New Twentieth Century…

DDIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Matunga Gymkhana, Mumbai

In the result, while of appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, that of assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 4768/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: S/ Shri Arvind Sonde/For Respondent: Shri M.Rajan

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 143(3)

…the Act it would be denied the benefit on the grounds that the entity has not complied with section 11 (5) of the Act. 14. Several decisions have considered and interpreted the scope, purpose and limits of the proviso to Section 2(15). In GS 1 India Vs. DGIT 360 ITR 138 (Del), the term trade, commerce or business was interpreted, and in that case even though the assessee was charging a fee having regard to the economic status of the beneficiaries, it was held that it was necessary for the operation and running expenses and the sustenance of charitable activities, that a fee could be charged. In the case of the a…

Matunga Gymkhana, Mumbai vs. ADIT (E) -I-(1), Mumbai

In the result, while of appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, that of assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 4468/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: S/ Shri Arvind Sonde/For Respondent: Shri M.Rajan

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 143(3)

DDIT (E)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Matunga Gymkhana, Mumbai

In the result, while of appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, that of assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 1809/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: S/ Shri Arvind Sonde/For Respondent: Shri M.Rajan

Section 11Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 13Section 13(1)Section 143(3)

DDIT (E), New Delhi vs. M/S Quality Council of India, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2754/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Suchitra Kambleay: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Raman Kant Garg, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: None

Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

…tality of the State. Therefore, it is not involved in carrying any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business. It was entitled to exemption u/s 10(23C)(iv).” 7.5. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of M/s GSI India vs. DIT, Delhi reported in 360 ITR 138 held that : “Section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was amended by the Finance Act, 2008, with effect from April 1, 2009, and a proviso was added to it. A second proviso was inserted to section 2(15) by the Finance Act, 2010, with retrospective effect from April 1, 2009. There are four main factors that need to be taken into consideration bef…

ADIT (E), New Delhi vs. M/S Apparel Export Promotion Council, New Delhi

In the result the both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 645/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu, J.M. & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am

For Appellant: Sh. KK Jaiswal, D.RFor Respondent: Sh. Kidus Puri, C.A

Section 11Section 12Section 2(15)Section 25

….O. 55/Del/13 (In ITA 645/Del/13) ITA 549/Del/15 A.Y. 2010-11 Apparel Export Promotion Council, New Delhi Delhi High Court has in the following cases laid down the positions of law that governs the proviso to section to 2(15) of the Act. i. GIS vs. DCIT (Del) 360 ITR 138 (Del.) ii. ICAI vs. DIT (Del.) 35 Taxmann.com 140 iii. India Trade Promotion vs. DGIT (E) 2015 (53 taxmann.com 404 (Del.) Applying the propositions laid down in all these cases to the facts of this case we uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue. Thus we uphold the findings of the First Appellate Authority and dismiss this ground. 7. On…

Sh. Dhruv Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 549/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu, J.M. & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am

For Appellant: Sh. KK Jaiswal, D.RFor Respondent: Sh. Kidus Puri, C.A

Section 11Section 12Section 2(15)Section 25

The Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4843/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 11(5)(iii)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

…the funds of a trust or institution is invested in assets other than those specified in Section 11(5), the exemption under sections 11 to 13 would be withdrawn. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of GS 1 India Vs. DGIT 360 ITR 138(Del) in support of the proposition that proviso to section 2(15) even where assessee trust was charging a fee having regard to the economic status of the beneficiaries, it was necessary for the operation and running expenses and the sustenance of charitable activities, that a fee could be charged. And it cannot be said that assessee was carrying…

DDIT (E), Delhi vs. M/S. All India Football Federation, New Delhi

ITA 6352/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Smt. Beena Pillai

Section 11Section 2(15)

…t not all activities of State agencies (some of which might be set up to carry on trading and commercial activities) can be considered charitable.” Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of GSI India vs. Director General of Income-tax (Exemption) & anr. [2014] 360 ITR 138 held vide para 36 of the judgment as under: “…….The object of the proviso is to draw a distinction between charitable institutions covered by the last limb which conduct business or otherwise business activities are undertaken by them to feed charity. The proviso applies when business was/is conducted and the quantum of receipts exceeds the spec…