Himachal Pradesh Environment Protection and Pollution Control Board v. CIT (9 ITR (Trib) 204)

Q: What is Himachal Pradesh Environment Protection and Pollution Control Board v. CIT authority for?

A regulatory function and charitable purposes under the Income-tax Act are not mutually exclusive. An entity engaged in a regulatory function can still be considered to be engaged in an activity for charitable purposes.

Q: How many judgments cite Himachal Pradesh Environment Protection and Pollution Control Board v. CIT?

15 judgments on BharatTax cite Himachal Pradesh Environment Protection and Pollution Control Board v. CIT (9 ITR (Trib) 204), spanning 2019 to 2019.

The DCIT, (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Nandesari Industries Association, Nandesari

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 333/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Uma Prasad, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Chokshi, C.A

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 13(8)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

…his reasoned finding of CIT(A) needs no interference from our side. We uphold the same." 6. I have also noted that on somewhat similar material facts, in case of a regulatory body i.e. Himachal Pradesh Environment Protection & Pollution Control Board vs. CIT, 9 ITR (Trib) 604, Chandigarh 'B' Bench of the Tribunal held as follows:- "8. We have noted that the learned Commissioner has proceeded on the assumption that the scope and connotations of "regulatory function" and "charitable purposes under the Income-tax Act" are mutually exclusive. While holding that the assessee was not engaged in an activity for charita…

Baroda Cricket Association, Vadodara vs. The Dy. CIT, (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 2675/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(15)Section 234BSection 271Section 28

…ITA No. 2675/Ahd/2017 Baroda Cricket Association Vs. DCIT Assessment year: 2014-15 Page 1 of 15 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar, VP and Ms. Madhumita Roy, JM] Assessment Year: 2014-15 Baroda Cricket Association ............…………......Appellant BCA House, 78, Harbhakti Extension, Race Course Circle, Vadodara-390007 [PAN : AAAAB 1410 E] Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) ...........................Respondent Circle-2, Ahmedabad Appearances by: SN Soparkar & Parin Shah, for the Appellant Aparna Agarwal, for the Respondent Date of concluding…

Baroda Cricket Association, Vadodara vs. The Dy. CIT, (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 1373/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 11(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(15)Section 28

…ITA No. 1373/Ahd/2017 Baroda Cricket Association Vs. DCIT Assessment year: 2012-13 Page 1 of 17 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar, VP and Ms. Madhumita Roy, JM] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Baroda Cricket Association ............…………......Appellant BCA House, 78, Harbhakti Extension, Race Course Circle, Vadodara-390007 [PAN : AAAAB 1410 E] Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) ...........................Respondent Circle-2, Ahmedabad Appearances by: SN Soparkar & Parin Shah, for the Appellant Aparna Agarwal, for the Respondent Date of concluding…

The DCIT, (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Nandesari Industries Association, Nandesari

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 174/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.171 & 174/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Chokshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr.DR

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

…is reasoned finding of CIT(A) needs no interference from our side. We uphold the same.” 6. I have also noted that on somewhat similar material facts, in case of a regulatory body i.e. Himachal Pradesh Environment Protection & Pollution Control Board vs. CIT, 9 ITR (Trib) 604, Chandigarh ‘B’ Bench of the Tribunal held as follows:- “8. We have noted that the learned Commissioner has proceeded on the assumption that the scope and connotations of "regulatory function" and "charitable purposes under the Income-tax Act" are mutually exclusive. While holding that the assessee was not engaged in an activity for charita…

The DCIT, (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Nandesari Industries Association, Nandesari

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 171/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.171 & 174/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Chokshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr.DR

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

…is reasoned finding of CIT(A) needs no interference from our side. We uphold the same.” 6. I have also noted that on somewhat similar material facts, in case of a regulatory body i.e. Himachal Pradesh Environment Protection & Pollution Control Board vs. CIT, 9 ITR (Trib) 604, Chandigarh ‘B’ Bench of the Tribunal held as follows:- “8. We have noted that the learned Commissioner has proceeded on the assumption that the scope and connotations of "regulatory function" and "charitable purposes under the Income-tax Act" are mutually exclusive. While holding that the assessee was not engaged in an activity for charita…