← All Phrases

“advancement of general public utility”

Charitable TrustsSection 2(15)Section 2(15)173 judgments

The decision most relied on for advancement of general public utility is ACIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (143 Taxmann.com 278), cited in 390 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on advancement of general public utility

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.

CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce
55 ITR 722 · 1965 · Supreme Court
167
citing judgments

An organization qualifies as having a charitable purpose if its primary object is the advancement of general public utility, even if its members receive incidental benefits. The existence of incidental non-charitable objects does not negate its charitable status.

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.

(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.

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.

Judgments citing advancement of general public utility

Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust, Pondicherry vs. DCIT, Exemptions, Chennai

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 144/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

above that the income from the above cannot be claimed as exempt in view of the activity of trade/commerce/business under the advancement of general public utility.” 7. Further, the learned counsel also stated that vide para 5.5, the CIT(A) has not allowed the claim of income from guest house ... income from commercial sale of guest houses cannot be claimed as exempt in view of the activity of trade/commerce/business under the advancement of general public utility. 8. Finally, according to the CIT(A) transactions of the assessee are commercial in nature to earn income and hence, hit by proviso

Sanghamitra Rural Financial Services, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions Circle-1, Bangalore

ITA 745/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

Section 11Section 2(15)Section 234ASection 8

above, the 1d. A.R. submitted that the proviso to section 2(15) would apply to those entities whose object of 'advancement of general public utility' is only a colourable device to hide the true purpose of trade, commerce, or business. XXiii. Thus, the activity carried by the assessee ... 11/2008, dated 19.12.2008 has stated that the proviso to section 2(15) will apply only to those entities whose purpose is ‘advancement of general public utility' and not in respect of the first three limbs of section 2(15) of the Act. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder

Sanghamitra Rural Financial Services, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions Circle-1, Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 744/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 11Section 2(15)Section 234ASection 8

above, the ld. A.R. submitted that the proviso to section 2(15) would apply to those entities whose object of ‘advancement of general public utility’ is only a colourable device to hide the true purpose of trade, commerce, or business. ITA Nos.744 & 745/Bang/2023 Sanghamitra Rural Financial Services, Bangalore Page ... 11/2008, dated 19.12.2008 has stated that the proviso to section 2(15) will apply only to those entities whose purpose is ‘advancement of general public utility’ and not in respect of the first three limbs of section 2(15) of the Act. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar vs. M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar

ITA 344/ASR/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar vs. M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar

ITA 421/ASR/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

The DCIT, Jalandhar vs. M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar

ITA 39/ASR/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

DCIT, Jalandhar vs. M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar

ITA 328/ASR/2007[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar vs. M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar

ITA 177/ASR/2006[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar vs. M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar

ITA 272/ASR/2004[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1997-98

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar vs. M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar

ITA 261/ASR/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1999-2000

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

M/S Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar vs. The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

ITA 129/ASR/2002[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1998-99

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

ITA 186/ASR/2001[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1994-95

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

ITA 185/ASR/2001[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1994-95

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

M/S. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust, Jalandhar vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

ITA 184/ASR/2001[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Dec 2023AY 1993-94

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. D. R
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 13Section 13(1)Section 13(3)Section 13(3)(c)Section 2(15)

11/12of the Act on the following two counts: (a) The object of the Trust does not fall within the charitable ambit of ‘advancement of general public utility’ in terms of section 2(15) of the Act; and (b) The assessee has violated provisions of section ... printing of newspaper was only a mode of propagating the concept of Punjab, Punjabi and Punjabiat, which is considered as an advancement of general public utility in terms of section 2(15) of the Act. In 21 ITA Nos. 184 to 186/Asr/2001 &Ors. Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v.Asstt

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Association of Mutual Funds in India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3201/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3201/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit(Exemption)-1(1) बिधम/ Association Of Mutual Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Funds In India Vs. Mtnl Building, Cumballa 71, 7Th Floor One Hill, Mumbai-400026. Indiabulls Centre Tower- 2, Wing B, 841 Senapati Bapat Marg Elphinstone Road, Mumbai-400013. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaca5550A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Joshi/Shri Samir Kapadia Revenue By: Shri Ajay Chandra (Cit-Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 28.10.2022 For The Ay. 2018-19. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee By Following The Tribunal Order In Assessee’S Own Case For Ay. 2012 13 & Ay. 2013-14 Wherein Exemption U/S 11 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Was Allowed To The Assessee. According To The Revenue, The Tribunal While Granting Exemption U/S 11 Of The Act Has Not Considered The Proviso To Section 2(15) Of The Act As Well As The Recent Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Acit(Exemptions) Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi/Shri SamirFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra (CIT-DR)
Section 11Section 13(8)Section 2(15)

preceding assessment years the activities undertaken by the Appellant were accepted as being for the benefit of general public and therefore, for advancement of general public utility. However, for the relevant assessment year the Revenue has taken a stand that the activities undertaken by the Appellant are for the benefit

Credit Guarantee Fund Trust for Micro and Small Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT (E), Mumbai

ITA 2684/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Karkhanis, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

deny the benefit of section 11 to the assessee trust on the premise that since the assessee trust is engaged in the advancement of general public utility and is charging fee in relation to the services rendered to trade, commercial etc. it is not entitled to the benefit under section ... finality. The AO in A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18 has taken a diverse view that the assessee is pursuing the activity of advancement of general public utility and is in activity of trade, commerce or business of charging fee for services, the assessment order passed

Mesers Improvement Trust, Fazilka vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(Exemptions), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 307/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 11Section 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 28

cost, or have been increased to much higher levels. E.2. It is held that though GS1 India is in fact, involved in advancement of general public utility, its services are for the benefit of trade and business, from which they receive significantly high receipts. In the circumstances, its claim

M.P.Madhyam, Bhopal vs. The DCIT Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 427/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

cost or marginal mark up over cost and above cost then such activities may fall within the description of one advancing the general public utility as held in para 251 as under: Page 18 of 22 ITA No.422 & other /Ind/2022 M.P. Madhyam Page 19 of 22 “251. The first consideration ... nominal mark-up over and above the cost incurred towards supplying the services, the activity may fall within the description of one advancing the general public utility. If on the other hand, there is a significant mark-up over the actual cost of service, the next step would be ascertain

M.P.Madhyam, Bhopal vs. The ACIT Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 425/IND/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

cost or marginal mark up over cost and above cost then such activities may fall within the description of one advancing the general public utility as held in para 251 as under: Page 18 of 22 ITA No.422 & other /Ind/2022 M.P. Madhyam Page 19 of 22 “251. The first consideration ... nominal mark-up over and above the cost incurred towards supplying the services, the activity may fall within the description of one advancing the general public utility. If on the other hand, there is a significant mark-up over the actual cost of service, the next step would be ascertain

M.P.Madhyam, Bhopal vs. The ACIT Exemption, Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 423/IND/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11Section 12ASection 13(8)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(15)Section 234D

cost or marginal mark up over cost and above cost then such activities may fall within the description of one advancing the general public utility as held in para 251 as under: Page 18 of 22 ITA No.422 & other /Ind/2022 M.P. Madhyam Page 19 of 22 “251. The first consideration ... nominal mark-up over and above the cost incurred towards supplying the services, the activity may fall within the description of one advancing the general public utility. If on the other hand, there is a significant mark-up over the actual cost of service, the next step would be ascertain