← All Phrases

“Section 10(15)”

Section References (mined)Section 10Section 10(15)157 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 10(15) is Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association (121 ITR 1), cited in 328 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 10(15)

Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association
121 ITR 1 · 1980 · Supreme Court
328
citing judgments

A charitable institution, whose predominant object is general public utility, can engage in non-charitable activities yielding incidental profits, provided these profits are deployed to achieve the dominant charitable object. A subsidiary object, if ancillary to the primary charitable purpose, does not negate the institution's charitable character.

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.
341 ITR 385 · 2012 · High Court
270
citing judgments

A provision for doubtful debts cannot be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes.

CIT v. Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd.
233 ITR 468 · 1998 · Supreme Court
246
citing judgments

Expenditure providing an enduring advantage, such as upfront lease rent for land, is revenue expenditure if no capital asset is acquired or generated, allowing for deduction under Section 37, even when capitalized in the books of account.

Queen’s Educational Society v. CIT
372 ITR 699 · 2015 · Supreme Court
152
citing judgments

An educational institution that generates a surplus does not automatically lose its charitable status or cease to exist solely for educational purposes. This is true if the surplus is reinvested for its educational objectives, and the predominant object test determines if the institution's primary aim is education or profit.

India Trade Promotion Organization v. DGIT(Exemption)
371 ITR 333 · 2015 · High Court
128
citing judgments

An institution engaged in the advancement of general public utility retains its charitable character and eligibility for exemptions under Section 11 or approval under Section 10(23C)(iv) provided profit is not its predominant motive, even if it generates incidental surpluses or collects fees.

Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. State of Karnataka
10 SCC 304 · 1996 · Reported
123
citing judgments

A 'trade' is primarily defined as the exchange of goods for goods or money, and secondarily as a business carried on with a view to profit. The term 'business' is more comprehensive than 'trade', encompassing manufacturing activities.

American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute v. CBDT
301 ITR 86 · 2008 · Supreme Court
111
citing judgments

An educational institution is eligible for exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) if it exists solely for educational purposes, even if it generates incidental profits. The mere existence of profit does not disqualify an institution from exemption.

(State of T.N v. Board of Trustees of the Port of Madras
4 SCC 630 · 1989 · Reported
108
citing judgments

An activity, even if it involves sales, does not constitute "business" for tax purposes if it is an incidental part of the main activities of a public utility entity and lacks a profit motive. The presence of a profit motive is generally essential to classify an activity as business.

Judgments citing Section 10(15)

DCIT- 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Aia Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai

ITA 1759/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1897/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd)- I/C Dcit, Circle-8(3)(1) Aaykar Bhavan, Room No. 615, M. K. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai- 400020. Vs. बनाम / M/S. Tata Aia Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 14Th Floor, Tower-A, Peninsula Business Park, Senapati, Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400013. Cross Objection No. 80/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.1897/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Tata Aia Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 14Th Floor, Tower-A, Peninsula Business Park, Senapati, Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400013. बनाम / Vs. Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd)- I/C Dcit, Circle-8(3)(1) Aaykar Bhavan, Room No. 615, M. K. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1759/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd)- I/C Dcit, Vs. Circle-8(3)(1) Aaykar Bhavan, Room No. 615, M. K. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai- 400020. M/S. Tata Aia Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 14Th Floor, Tower-A, Peninsula Business Park, Senapati, Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400013.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das (DR)
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 44

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN