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

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…