← All Phrases

“proviso to section 2(15)”

Charitable TrustsSection 2(15)Section 2(15)581 judgments

The decision most relied on for proviso to section 2(15) is ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (143 Taxmann.com 278), cited in 390 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on proviso to section 2(15)

ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
143 Taxmann.com 278 · 2022 · Supreme Court
390
citing judgments

If activities for the advancement of general public utility are carried on as a business, income from such activities is not exempt under Section 11, even if the profits are utilized for the main charitable object. The argument that profits from general public utility activities can be ploughed back to charity to maintain exemption is not a good law.

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.

362 ITR 539 (Gujarat) (d) Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. DGIT
347 ITR 99 · 2012 · High Court
112
citing judgments

The broad definition of 'business' should not be applied when interpreting the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as the object and purpose of the section must be considered.

Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. ACIT
396 ITR 323 · 2017 · High Court
108
citing judgments

Development authorities can continue to be regarded as existing for a 'Charitable Purpose' under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, even after the introduction of the proviso to that section. The contention that such authorities automatically lose their charitable status due to the proviso is incorrect.

Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) v. DGIT (Exemptions)
358 ITR 91 · 2013 · High Court
80
citing judgments

An institution carrying out charitable objects, such as education or advancement of general public utility, does not lose its Section 11 exemption merely by collecting fees for activities like campus placements or educational guidance, as this does not constitute carrying on a business.

DIT v. Sabarmati Gaushala Trust
362 ITR 539 · 2014 · High Court
63
citing judgments

Activities of a trust established for the advancement of general public utility do not constitute a 'business' activity if undertaken without private motive, thus qualifying for exemption under Section 11 read with Section 2(15), even when charging fees or receiving consideration.

Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Sai Publication Fund
258 ITR 70 · 2002 · Supreme Court
62
citing judgments

If a charitable organization's dominant activity is not business, then any incidental or ancillary activity performed to achieve its main object will also not be considered 'business,' even if it generates income, provided the primary activity is not driven by a profit intent.

Judgments citing proviso to section 2(15)

The Crafts Council of India, Chennai vs. JCIT(Exemptions), Chennai

ITA 946/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.943, 944, 945 & 946/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-2012, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) The Crafts Council Of India, Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Gf Temple Trees, Tax, Venkatnarayanana Road, (Exemptions) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatc 1433B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, IRS, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

disclosing NIL income. During the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (JCIT) invoked proviso to section 2(15) in respect of certain income which in herview were in the nature of trade and commerce and by denying the exemption available ... helping poor craftman who develop their skills and market their ware. The trust is only helping poor craftman and hence the proviso to section 2(15)will not apply. In any event the trust is acting only as the conduit pipe for the poor craft man to sell their crafts

The Crafts Council of India, Chennai vs. JCIT (Exemptions), Chennai

ITA 945/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.943, 944, 945 & 946/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-2012, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) The Crafts Council Of India, Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Gf Temple Trees, Tax, Venkatnarayanana Road, (Exemptions) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatc 1433B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, IRS, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

disclosing NIL income. During the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (JCIT) invoked proviso to section 2(15) in respect of certain income which in herview were in the nature of trade and commerce and by denying the exemption available ... helping poor craftman who develop their skills and market their ware. The trust is only helping poor craftman and hence the proviso to section 2(15)will not apply. In any event the trust is acting only as the conduit pipe for the poor craft man to sell their crafts

The Crafts Council of India, Chennai vs. JCIT(Exemptions), Chennai

ITA 944/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.943, 944, 945 & 946/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-2012, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) The Crafts Council Of India, Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Gf Temple Trees, Tax, Venkatnarayanana Road, (Exemptions) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatc 1433B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, IRS, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

disclosing NIL income. During the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (JCIT) invoked proviso to section 2(15) in respect of certain income which in herview were in the nature of trade and commerce and by denying the exemption available ... helping poor craftman who develop their skills and market their ware. The trust is only helping poor craftman and hence the proviso to section 2(15)will not apply. In any event the trust is acting only as the conduit pipe for the poor craft man to sell their crafts

M/S Council for Leather Exports, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai Circlechennai, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 948/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 948/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Council For Leather V. Income Tax (Exemption), Exports, Chennai Circle, No.1, Sivaganga Road, Chennai-34. Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aaacc-4697-G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. Krishnan Ramaswamy, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.05.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Krishnan Ramaswamy, JCIT
Section 10Section 11Section 11(5)Section 2Section 2(15)

their activities are restricted to contributions from and participation of only their members, these would not fall under the purview of the proviso to section 2(15) owing to :-3-: ITA. No:948/Chny/2023 the principle of mutuality. However, if such organizations have dealings with non-members, their claim ... charitable organizations would now be governed by the additional conditions stipulated in the proviso to section 2 (15). 3.5 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) (NFAC) should have appreciated that balance income is interest from the Deposits with commercial banks made in accordance with provisions of section