Section 2(15) — 1,405 case laws

Huhtamaki Foundation, Mumbai vs. The CIT (Exem), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1911/MUM/2023[2022-23]Status: PendingITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das

preservation of environment and it aims to achieve the same by recycling post-consumer plastic waste. The learned AR further submitted that under section 2(15) of the Act preservation of environment is included within the definition of “charitable purpose”, therefore the activities of the assessee fall within the ambit ... with retrospective effect from 01/04/2009, preservation of environment (including watersheds, forests, and wildlife), was included in the definition of “charitable purpose” under section 2(15) of the Act. From the perusal of the memorandum explaining the provisions in the Finance (No.2) Bill, 2009, forming part of the paper book from

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)

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 ... persons of the society. It is benefited to limited person i.e. Members of the assessee company only, hence the proviso to section 2(15) of the LT. Act is applicable and not entitled to exemption u/s 11 of the Act in view of the provisions of section

The Synthetic & Art Silks Mills Research Association, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1340/MUM/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Synthetic & Art Mills The Cit(E), Research Association, Room No. 601, 6Th Floor, Cumballa Sasmira Marg, Worli Vs. Hill, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Mumbai-400025. Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaatt 4271 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Girish Dave, Adv. &For Respondent: Mr. S. Srinivasu, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 12ASection 263

account of it being covered by the exemption u/s 11 of the Act on account of it being covered by the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. Accordingly, invoking section proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. Accordingly, invoking section proviso to section 2(15 ... assessee is entitled to exemption or due to scenario whether the assessee is entitled to exemption or due to applicability of provisions of Section 2(15) r.w.s. 13(8) of the Act y of provisions of Section 2(15) r.w.s. 13(8) of the Act y of provisions of Section

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)

quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, CIT(A) erred in invoking the proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act and thereby rejecting the claim of exemption u/s 11 of the Act by relying on the findings given ... held in the appellant's own case for AY 2010-11, AY 2011-12 and AY 2014-15 that the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act cannot be invoked in appellant's case and that it is eligible for the benefits of sections

DCIT Circle-1(1) Exemption, New Delhi vs. India International Centre, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1872/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Dohare, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

benefits only to selected persons and not to public at large. These activities, cannot be called as charitable activity within the purview of section 2(15) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that ... following grounds:- a) The scrutiny assessment for the Asst Years 2016-17 and 2017-18 were completed by invoking the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act denying the benefit of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iv) of the Act and income computed under Chapter

DCIT Circle-1(1) Exemption, New Delhi vs. India International Centre, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1871/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Dohare, Sr. DR

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 263

benefits only to selected persons and not to public at large. These activities, cannot be called as charitable activity within the purview of section 2(15) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that ... following grounds:- a) The scrutiny assessment for the Asst Years 2016-17 and 2017-18 were completed by invoking the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act denying the benefit of exemption u/s 10(23C)(iv) of the Act and income computed under Chapter

Bhamashah Sundarlal Daga Charitable Trust, Bikaner vs. CIT - Exemption, Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 278/JODH/2023[2022-23 to 2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur10 Nov 2023

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.278/Jodh/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : N.A. Bhamashah Sundarlal Daga The Commissioner Of Charitable Trust, V Income Tax-Exemption, Bagree Mohallan, S Jaipur. Bikaner – 334001. Pan: Aaetb1013C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee By Shri Suresh Ojha – Ar Revenue By Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 10/11/2023

Section 12Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Daga Charitable Trust [A] l/[1980] 2 Taxman 501, where the speech made by the Finance Minister, while introducing the exclusionary clause in section 2(15) of the Act, was relied upon by the Court for the purpose of ascertaining what was the reason for introducing that clause

DCIT (Exemption) Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Gautam Budh Healthcare Foundation, Noida

Appeal of the appellant is partly allowed

ITA 1447/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. C.N. Prasadassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit (Exemptions) Gautam Budh Healthcare Foundation, Noida C-1, Sec-12, Circle Vs Noida Ghaziabad Pan No.Aaatg4991Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 13Section 143(3)Section 2(15)

society during the instant assessment year were not found to be covered by any limb of charitable purpose' as defined in section 2(15) of the IT Act, 1961. 2. Whether allowability of exemption and violation of prescribed Law may go hand in hand as the assessee was found

District Adult Education Association, Kota vs. CIT(Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee Association is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 419/JPR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Oct 2023AY 2023-24

Bench: Rejecting The Application For Registration.

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwaal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT-DR

Section 12A

which is the primary source of income for the applicant Hence the applicant society cannot be held as charitable within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Based on above, I am satisfied that the applicant trust is not fit for registration and, therefore, registration

Income Tax Officer(Exem.)-(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off

ITA 2320/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 260A

interest income of Rs.1,22,74,579 received by the assessee is brought to tax separately, treating an income within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the IT Act and no expenses are allowed, as no real expenditure is incurred to earn this income." Therefore, the ground is coming ... public at large, therefore these objects are not covered within the ambit of charitable purpose' as defined under the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act. 2. Whether on the facts of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) was justified in directing the AO to allow

Income Tax Officer(Exem.)-(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off

ITA 2319/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 260A

interest income of Rs.1,22,74,579 received by the assessee is brought to tax separately, treating an income within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the IT Act and no expenses are allowed, as no real expenditure is incurred to earn this income." Therefore, the ground is coming ... public at large, therefore these objects are not covered within the ambit of charitable purpose' as defined under the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act. 2. Whether on the facts of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) was justified in directing the AO to allow

Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme, Mumbai vs. ITO (E)-1(1), Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off

ITA 2190/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 260A

interest income of Rs.1,22,74,579 received by the assessee is brought to tax separately, treating an income within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the IT Act and no expenses are allowed, as no real expenditure is incurred to earn this income." Therefore, the ground is coming ... public at large, therefore these objects are not covered within the ambit of charitable purpose' as defined under the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act. 2. Whether on the facts of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) was justified in directing the AO to allow

Bank of India Retired Employees Medical Assistance Scheme, Mumbai vs. ITO (E)-1(1), Mumbai

Appeals are disposed off

ITA 2186/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh S Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 260A

interest income of Rs.1,22,74,579 received by the assessee is brought to tax separately, treating an income within the meaning of Section 2(15) of the IT Act and no expenses are allowed, as no real expenditure is incurred to earn this income." Therefore, the ground is coming ... public at large, therefore these objects are not covered within the ambit of charitable purpose' as defined under the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act. 2. Whether on the facts of the case and in law, the Ld. CITIA) was justified in directing the AO to allow

DCIT, Circle-1(1)-Exemption, New Delhi vs. Hamdard Laboratories (India), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1311/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri T James Singson, CIT, DR

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 13(2)Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 250

that the assessee claimed exemption under section 10(23C)(iv) and that the objects of the Trust being charitable within the meaning of section 2(15) the benefit of section 11 and 12 is allowed. There is no change either in facts or in law in AY 2016-17 from